Agenda packet, first session — Malibu City Council, February 9, 2026 (part 1 of 2)

PLEASE DOWNLOAD THE AGENDA DOCUMENT FOR

INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING
Amended Agenda
CC260209_AMENDED_AGENDA.PDF
Item 1B2
Approve Warrants
CC260209_ITEM 1B2.PDF
Item 1B3
Approval of Minutes
CC260209_ITEM 1B3.PDF
Item 1B4
Park Enhancement and Donation Program
CC260209_ITEM 1B4.PDF
CC260209_ITEM 1B4_SUPPLEMENTAL.PDF
Item 1B5
Retired Annuitant Extra-Help Agreement for Gigi Decavalles-Hughes CC260209_ITEM_1B5.PDF
Item 5A
Proposed Amendments to the Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance CC260209_ITEM 5A.PDF
CC260209_ITEM 5A_SUPPLEMENTAL.PDF

1. Documents:

2. Documents:

3. Documents:

4. Documents:

5. Documents:

6. Documents:

CC260209_ITEM 5A.PDF
CC260209_ITEM 5A_SUPPLEMENTAL.PDF
Item 6A
Update on Temporary Use and Sign Permit Regulations and Consideration of Zoning Text Amendment
CC260209_ITEM 6A.PDF
Item 8A
Council Appointment to the Public Safety Commission
CC260209_ITEM 8A.PDF
Documents:

7. Documents:

8. Documents:

HOW TO VIEW THE MEETING: The meeting will be live streamed at www.malibucity.org/video and via Zoom Webinar.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE BEFORE THE MEETING: Members of the public are encouraged to submit email correspondence to [email protected] before the meeting begins.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN-PERSON DURING THE MEETING: In order to participate inperson, each speaker must complete and submit to the Recording Secretary a Request to Speak form.

In-person participants may also surrender their opportunity to speak on a particular item to defer one minute to another in-person speaker. Meeting room doors will open 30 minutes before the meeting.

HOW TO PARTICIPATE REMOTELY DURING THE MEETING: The City has been experiencing extreme technical issues with its broadcast and zoom capabilities. It is strongly recommended that those who wish to participate do so in person as zoom participation is not guaranteed. While the City intends to allow zoom participation if possible, the meeting will not be cancelled or continued if technical difficulties impact the ability to accept public participation over Zoom. In such case only in-person participation will be allowed. In order to participate remotely, you must be present in the Zoom Webinar during the item that you would like to speak on and use the Raise Hand feature to request to speak when the Mayor calls the item. When you join the Zoom Webinar you may see a pop-up asking you to enter an email address, but a valid email address is not required.

Amended1 Malibu City Council
Regular Meeting Agenda
Monday, February 9, 2026
4:00 P.M. - CLOSED SESSION
City Hall – Council Chambers (call to order)
Westward Room (closed session)
23825 Stuart Ranch Road
5:30 P.M. – CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
City Hall – Council Chambers
23825 Stuart Ranch Road
Zoom Webinar Link:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/87985644870
Four p.m. Convene for Purpose of Closed Session
Call to Order – Mayor (Council Chambers)
Public Comment on Closed Session Items
1 See the addition of Closed Session and Consent Calendar Item No. 1.B.5.

AMENDED City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page - 2 - February 9, 2026 Recess to Closed Session (to be held in the Westward Room) This time has been set aside for the City Council to meet in a closed session to discuss matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9. Based on the advice of the City Attorney, discussion in open session concerning these matters would prejudice the position of the City in this litigation. The City Attorney will give an additional oral report regarding the Closed Session at the beginning of the next regular City Council meeting. At the conclusion of the Closed Session, the Council may continue any item listed on the Closed Session agenda to the Open Session agenda for discussion or to take formal action as it may deem appropriate.

Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1):

1. Case Name: City’s Petition to Form Malibu USD from Territory in the Santa Monica-Malibu USD
Conference with Legal Counsel – Anticipated Litigation

1. Initiation of litigation pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d) of Government Code section 54956.9
Number of potential cases: (3)
Five-thirty p.m. Regular Session
Call to Order - Mayor
Roll Call - Recording Secretary
Pledge of Allegiance
Closed Session Report
Report on Posting of Agenda – January 30, 2026; Amended Agenda posted February 6, 2026 Approval of Agenda

1. Consent Calendar
Items in Consent Calendar Section A have already been considered by the Council at a previous meeting where the public was invited to comment, after which a decision was made. Resolutions concerning decisions made at previous meetings are for the purpose of memorializing the decision to assure the accuracy of the findings, the prior vote, and any conditions imposed. Items in Consent Calendar Section B have not been discussed previously by the Council. Members of the public may comment on the consent calendar as a whole. After public comment, the Council may remove items from the Consent Calendar for individual consideration before adopting the Consent Calendar.

A. Previously Discussed Items
None.

AMENDED City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page - 3 - February 9, 2026 B. New Items

1. Waive Further Reading
Recommended Action: After the City Attorney has read the title, waive full reading of ordinances considered on this agenda for introduction on first reading and/or second reading and adoption.

Staff Contact: Interim City Attorney Rusin, 456-2489, ext. 228

2. Approve Warrants
Recommended Action: Allow and approve warrant demand numbers 77869-77976 on the register from the General Fund and direct the City Manager to pay out the funds to each of the claimants listed in Warrant Register No. 783 in the amount of the warrant appearing opposite their names, for the purposes stated on the respective demands in a total amount of $2,115,002.18. City of Malibu payroll check number 5557-5559 and ACH deposits were issued in the amount of $596,023.10.

Staff Contact: Interim City Manager DuBoux, 456-2489, ext. 226

3. Approval of Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes for the July 10, 2025 Special Meeting.

Staff Contact: City Clerk Pettijohn, 456-2489, ext. 228

4. Park Enhancement and Donation Program
Recommended Action: At the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission, approve revisions to the Park Enhancement and Donation Program.

Staff Contact: Community Services Director Riesgo, 456-2489, ext. 350

5. Retired Annuitant Extra-Help Agreement for Gigi Decavalles-Hughes Recommended Action: 1) At the recommendation of the City Manager, approve the appointment of Gigi Decavalles-Hughes pursuant to Government Code Section 21224; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the retired annuitant extra-help agreement with Ms. Decavalles-Hughes.

Staff Contact: Assistant City Manager Smith, 456-2489, ext. 239

2. Ceremonial/Presentations
A. Presentation of City Tile to Chris Frost for his service on the Public Safety Commission B. City Council Reorganization

1. Presentations to Outgoing Mayor

2. Remarks by Outgoing Mayor
AMENDED City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page - 4 - February 9, 2026

3. Election of Mayor

4. Election of Mayor Pro Tem

5. Administration of Oath of Office to Newly Elected Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem

6. Remarks by Newly Elected Mayor

3. Commission / Committee / City Manager Updates

4. Written and Oral Communications from the Public (Subsequent items to be heard after 6:30 p.m.) The Oral Communication portion of the agenda is for members of the public to present items, which are not listed on the agenda but are under the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. No action may be taken under, except to direct staff, unless the Council, by a two-thirds vote, determines that there is a need to take immediate action and that need came to the attention of the City after the posting of the agenda. Although no action may be taken, the Council and staff will follow up, at an appropriate time, on those items needing response.

A. Communications from the Public concerning matters which are not on the agenda but for which the City Council has subject matter jurisdiction. City Council may not act on these matters except to refer the matters to staff or schedule the matters for a future agenda.

B. City Council Subcommittee reports / Mayor and Councilmember meeting attendance, reports and inquiries

5. Ordinances and Public Hearings
For Public Hearings involving zoning matters the appellant and applicant will be given 15 minutes each to present their position to the City Council, including rebuttal time.

A. Proposed Amendments to the Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance Recommended Action: 1) After the City Attorney reads the title of the ordinance, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 532 , an ordinance of the City of Malibu amending Chapter 5.16 (Mobilehome Park Rent Control Regulations) of Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations) and repealing Chapter 2.28 (Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission) of Title 2 (Administration and Personnel) of the Malibu Municipal Code, and finding the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and 2) Direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 532 for the February 23, 2026 City Council Regular Meeting.

Staff Contact: Interim City Manager DuBoux, 456-2489, ext. 226 AMENDED City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page - 5 - February 9, 2026

6. Old Business
Old Business items have appeared on previous agendas with no final action having been taken.

A. Update on Temporary Use and Sign Permit Regulations and Consideration of Zoning Text Amendment
Recommended Action: 1) Receive update on the implementation of Ordinance No. 526, amendments to Temporary Use Permit (TUP) and Sign Permit regulations to support economic recovery following the impacts of the 2025 Palisades Fire; 2) Adopt Resolution No. 26-06, initiating a Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) to Title 17 (Zoning) of the Malibu Municipal Code (MMC) related to TUP and Sign Permit regulations; 3) Bypass the Zoning Ordinance Revisions and Code Enforcement Subcommittee (ZORACES) review; and 4) Direct the Planning Commission to schedule a public hearing regarding the same.

Staff Contact: Community Development Director Bundy, 456-2489, ext. 229

7. New Business
New Business items are appearing for the first time for formal action.

None.

8. Council Items
City Council Items are items, which individual members of the City Council may bring up for action, to propose future agenda items or to suggest future staff assignments.

A. Council Appointment to the Public Safety Commission
Recommended Action: Councilmember Stewart to make a new appointment to the Public Safety Commission.

Staff Contact: City Clerk Pettijohn, 456-2489, ext. 228 Adjournment
Future Regular Meetings
Monday, February 23, 2026 5:30 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting City Hall Council Chambers Monday, March 9, 2026 5:30 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting City Hall Council Chambers Monday, March 23, 2026 5:30 p.m. Regular City Council Meeting City Hall Council Chambers Guide to the City Council Proceedings and Decorum
Public Communications: Each speaker is limited to three (3) minutes. Members of the public may speak during the meeting in-person or through the Zoom application, although it is strongly recommended that those who wish to participate do so in person. While the City intends to allow zoom participation, the meeting will not be cancelled or continued if technical difficulties impact the ability to accept public comment over Zoom. In order to participate remotely, you must be present in the Zoom Webinar during the item that you would like to speak on and use the Raise Hand feature to request to speak when the Mayor calls the item. In order to participate in-person, each speaker must complete and submit to the Recording Secretary a Request to Speak form prior to the beginning of the item being announced by the Mayor. In-person participants may surrender their time by deferring one (1) minute to another in-person speaker, not to exceed a total of eight (8) minutes. The speaker wishing to defer time must be present when the item is heard and their form must be submitted with the speaker form for the individual they are deferring time to. Speakers are taken in the order slips are submitted or hands are raised.

AMENDED City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Page - 6 - February 9, 2026 On specific agenda items Councilmembers may question any person addressing the City Council at the conclusion of all public testimony on that agenda item before the Council. Councilmembers shall not engage any member of the public in a dialogue with themselves other Councilmembers, city staff or other members of the public.

Role of the Presiding Officer: The presiding officer of the City Council, who shall be the Mayor, shall be responsible for maintaining the order and decorum of meetings. It shall be the duty of the presiding officer to ensure that these rules of procedure and decorum are followed at all times. The presiding officer shall maintain control of communication between Councilmembers, between the Council and the public, and chair each meeting in a fair and impartial manner. It shall be the duty of each Councilmember to support the presiding officer in maintaining the order and decorum of Council meetings.

Members of the Audience: Members of the audience shall not engage in disorderly or boisterous conduct, including clapping, whistling, stamping of feet, or other acts which disturb, disrupt, impede or otherwise disturb the orderly conduct of the City Council meeting. Persons addressing the City Council shall not engage in disorderly conduct which disrupts, or otherwise impedes the orderly conduct or Council meetings. Any person who so disrupts a Council meeting may, at the discretion of the presiding officer or a majority of the City Council, be subject to ejection from that meeting.

No new items will be taken-up after 10:30 p.m. without a two-thirds vote of the City Council.

City Council meetings are aired live and replayed on City of Malibu Government Access Channel 3 and are available on demand on the City’s website at www.malibucity.org/video. Copies of the staff reports or other written documentation relating to each item of business described above are on file in the office of the City Clerk, Malibu City Hall, 23825 Stuart Ranch Road, Malibu, California, and are available for public inspection during regular office hours, which are 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Friday. Written materials distributed to the City Council within 72 hours of the City Council meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City Clerk's office at 23825 Stuart Ranch Road, Malibu, California (Government Code Section 54957.5.b.2). Copies of staff reports and written materials may be purchased for $0.10 per page.

TheCity Hall phone number is (310) 456-2489. To contact City Hall using a telecommunication device for the deaf (TDD), please call (800) 735-2929 and a California Relay Service operator will assist you. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Environmental Sustainability Director Yolanda Bundy, (310) 456-2489, ext. 229. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. [28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADD Title II].

Requests to show an audio or video presentation during a Council meeting should be directed to the Media Team at [email protected]. Material must be submitted by 12:00 p.m. on the meeting day.

I hereby certify under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted in accordance with the applicable legal requirements. Regular and Adjourned Regular meeting agendas may be amended up to 72 hours in advance of the meeting. Dated this 6th day of February 2026 at 3:30 p.m.

Kelsey Pettijohn, City Clerk
WARRANT REGISTER NO. 783
City Council Meeting
2-09-26
Item

1.B.2.

On February 9, 2026, the Malibu City Council allowed and approved warrant demand numbers 77869-77976 from the General Fund. The City Manager is hereby directed to pay out the funds named hereon to each of the claimants listed, the amount appearing opposite their name> for the purpose stated on the respective demands, making a total of $2,115,002.18. City of Malibu payroll check numbers 5557-5559 and ACH deposits were issued in the amount of $596,023.10.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th day of February 2026.

ATTEST:

Kelsey Pettijohn
City Clerk
Marianne Riggins
Mayor

CERTIFICATE
In accordance with Government Code Sections 37202 and Malibu Municipal Code 3.08.050, I hereby certify that: (1) the claims or demands set forth in the warrant register(s) listed below and attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference in the aggregate amount of $2,711,025.28 have been audited as to their accuracy; and (2) sufficient funds have been appropriated by the City Council and are available for the payment thereof.

EXECUTED this 29th day of January 2026, AT MALIBU, CALIFORNIA Robert DuBoux
Interim City Manager
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Accounts Payable
Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number
User: sflores
Printed: 1/28/2026 3 :22 PM
Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount 77869 13STARS 13 STARS MEDIA 01/15/2026 0.00 324.36
77870 AMERGLOE AMERICAN GLOBAL SECURITY INC 01/15/2026 0.00 2,100.00 77871 BROCOU COURTNEY BROWN 01/15/2026 0.00 536.70
77872 BURNS BURNS PACIFIC CONSTRUCTION INC 01/15/2026 0.00 1,531.74 77873 ENHANCE2 ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MANAGEMl 01/15/2026 0.00 48,177.89 77874 FERCANOL LAURA DEMIERI FERCANO 01/15/2026 0.00 90.00 77875 FRONTIER FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC 01/15/2026 0.00 6,674.33 77876 GIINDUS GI INDUSTRIES 01/15/2026 0.00 317.80
77877 HDSUPPLY HD SUPPLY INC 01/15/2026 0.00 314.11
77878 LACOWAT LA CO MALIBU TREASURER-WATER"' 01/15/2026 0.00 204.58 77879 MASTERCO MASTER COOLING CORPORATION • 01/15/2026 0.00 1,884.97 77880' MOSSER MOSSER PLUMBING & HEATING INC 01/15/2026 0.00 322.50 77881 NATIONA NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTAL~ 01/15/2026 0.00 941.10 77882 NRPA2 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK.A' 01/15/2026 0.00 470.00 77883 OSBORNEN ENID OSBORN 01/15/2026 0.00 2,700.00
77884 SCEDISO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON crn 01/15/2026 0.00 286.29 77885 SESACLLC SESAC RIGHTS MANAGEMENT INC 01/15/2026 0.00 641.00 77886 STAPLES STAPLES CONTRACT & COMMERCIAi 01/15/2026 0.00 1,303.32 77887 TMOBILE T-MOBILE USA INC 01/15/2026 0.00 1,105.54 77888 TOSHIBA US BAfil( NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 01/15/2026 0.00 4,404.70 77889 ULTMAINT ULTIMATE MAINTENANCE SERVICES 01/15/2026 0.00 7,399.23 77890 VERIZONW VERIZON WIRELESS SEl,lVICES LLC 01/15/2026 0.00 .6,479.28 77891 VIAWEST FLEXENTIAL COLORADO CORP . 01/15/2026 0.00 3j?l8.59 . }
77892 USBANK2 USBANK \01/15/2026 0.00 ,765.33
" 77893 4IMPRINT 4IMPRINT INC 01/22/2026 0.00 7,283.27
77894 4LEAF 4LEAFINC 01/22/2026 0.00 36,570.00
77895 ACCOUNTE OFFICE TEAM A ROBERT HALF COMP 01/22/2026 0.00 4,174.57 77896 ADVANTAN MAP COMMUNICATIONS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 291.79 77897 ANAWALT ANAWALT LUMBER CO INC 01/22/2026 0.00 11.66 77898 APPLE APPLEONE 01/22/2026 0.00 22,859.11
77899 BADDAY BADGER DAYLIGHTING CORP 01/22/2026 0.00 2,365.90 77900 BBK BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 01/22/2026 0.00 136,724.84 77901 BEARCON BEAR CONTRACTORS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 1,105.00 77902 BERIDS IDSTIN BERANICH 01/22/2026 0.00 129.00
77903 CASTRATE CALIFORNIA STRATEGIES & ADVOCP 01/22/2026 0.00 12,500.00 77904 CMS RICHARD COMI 01/22/2026 0.00 1,050.00
77905 COASTALW CALIFORNIA COASTAL WORKS LLC 01/22/2026 0.00 1,711.00 77906 COOKALI ALLISON COOK 01/22/2026 0.00 11,220.00
77907 EARTHCAl\1 EARTHCAM INC - 01/22/2026 0.00 832.75
77908 EXCELOFF EXCEL OFFICE SERVICES 01/22/2026 0.00 580.35 77909 FREDERIC FREDERICK FISHER & PARTNERS ARC 01/22/2026 0.00 34,450.00 77910 GOLDININ GOLDIN INDUSTRIES INC 01/22/2026 0.00 206.10 77911 GOVERNF GOVERNMENTAL FINANCIAL SERVIC 01/22/2026 0.00 5,197.50 77912 GUTSTE STEVEN GUTIERREZ 01/22/2026 0.00 900.00
77913 HDL HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSOCI 01/22/2026 0.00 1,465.67 77914 HDSUPPLY HD SUPPLY INC 01/22/2026 0.00 208.15
77915 JACADAB DANIELA JACOBSON 01/22/2026 '0.00 350.00
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (1/28/2026 3:22 PM) Page 1 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount 77916 KIMLEY KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC INC 01/22/2026 0.00 4,987.50 77917 LACOCLE LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER 01/22/2026 0.00 75.00 77918 LACOCLE LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER 01/22/2026 0.00 75.00 77919 LACOCLE LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER 01/22/2026 0.00 75.00 ·77920 LACOCLE LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER 01/22/2026 0.00 75.00 77921 LACOCLE LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECORDER 01/22/2026 0.00 75.00 77922 LACOFIR LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPART 01/22/2026 0.00 14,517.00 77923 LARICS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES LA-RI CS 01/22/2026 0.00 600.00 77924 MALICOM MALIBU COMMUNITY LABOR EXCH) 01/22/2026 0.00 1,989.00 77925 MALIMONP MALIBU MONARCH PROJECT 01/22/2026 0.00 2,500.00 77926 MALISEAF MALIBU SEAFOOD INC 01/22/2026 0.00 380.00 77927 MARPAU PAULETTE MARDIKIAN 01/22/2026 0.00 71-.96
77928 MNS MNS ENGINEERS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 58.75
77929 MOSSER MOSSER PLUMBING & HEATING INC 01/22/2026 0.00 590.56. 77930 NUNNIT NITZANNUN 01/22/2026 0.00 206.10
77931 PACIFICP PACIFIC PRODUCTION SERVICES INC 01/22/2026 0.00 1,000.00 77932 PARKERB JOYCE PARKER-BO2YLINSKI 01/22/2026 0.00 5,130.00 77933 PEGASUSS PEGASUS STUDIOS 01/22/2026 0.00 11,310.00 77934 RPBARRI RP BARRICADE INC 01/22/2026 0.00 845.99
77935 SCAFCA SCAOFCALLC 01/22/2026 0.00 11,491.20
77936 SCEDISO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON crn 01/22/2026 0.00 32,207.95 77937 SEKMAR MARINA SEK 01/22/2026 0.00 12,432.00
77938 SMASH SMASH ATHLETICS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 926.49
77939 SOLIDWA SOLID WASTE SOLUTIONS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 12,367.50 77940 TOWNSPUB TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC 01/22/2026 0.00 6,500.00 77941 UHRIS STEVE UHRING 01/22/2026 0.00 364.93
77942 ULINE ULINEINC 01/22/2026 0.00 35!.55
77943 ULTMAINT ULTIMATE MAINTENANCE SERVICES 01/22/2026 0.00 1,900.00 77944 UNDERGR UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT OF 1 01/22/2026 0.00 197.33 77945 USBANK4 USBANKN.A. 01/22/2026 0.00 36,090.00
77946 WBCPINC WBCPINC 01/22/2026 0.00 34,432.87
77947 WILLSCOT WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC 01/22/2026 0.00 10,098.33 77948 WITTOBRI WITT OBRIENS LLC 01/22/2026 0.00 51,190.00 77949 13STARS 13 STARS MEDIA 01/28/2026 0.00 58.14
77950 ANAWALT ANAWALT LUMBER CO INC 01/28/2026 0.00 5.48 77951 ATLASPLA ATLAS PLANNING SOLUTIONS 01/28/2026 0.00 4,720.00 77952 CIVICSO CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 01/28/2026 0.00 18,195.00 77953 CLEANHAR CLEAN HARBORS ENVIRONMENTAL 01/28/2026 0.00 7,016.98 77954 COTTON COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES INC 01/28/2026 0.00 160,283.50 77955 CRUZSTRA CRUZ STRATEGIES LLC 01/28/2026 0.00 10,000.00 77956 CSGCON CSG CONSULTANTS INC 01/28/2026 0.00 3,809.50 77957 CSTASC CONSTANT AND ASSOCIATES INC 01/28/2026 0.00 11,045.65 77958 DEPTCON DEPT OF CONSERVATION 01/28/2026 0.00 14,000.20 77959 ESA ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ASSOCIA'. 01/28/2026 0.00 3,J60.25 77960 GIMAREST GIMA RESTAURANT INC 01/28/2026 0.00 7,500.00 77961 GUTSTE STEVEN GUTIERREZ 01/28/2026 0.00 175.00
77962 LACOSHE LA CO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT 01/28/2026 0.00 934,442.55 77963 LAZPARKI LAZ KARP ASSOCIATES LLC 01/28/2026 0.00 45,499.77 77964 LEAGOFCA LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES 01/28/2026 0.00 7,153.00 77965 MPRINC M PUBLIC RELATIONS INC 01/28/2026 0.00 2,300.00 77966 OCMOUNn OC MOUNTS LLC 01/28/2026 0.00 2,311.24
77967 PEOPCON TH PEOPLE CONCERN 01/28/2026 0.00 25,625.00 77968 QUADFIN QUADIENT FINANCE USA INC 01/28/2026 0.00 1,000.00 77969 REMOTESA REMOTE SATELLITE SYSTEMS INT'L 01/28/2026 0.00 268.00 77970 RINCONC RINCON CONSULTANTS INC 01/28/2026 0.00 92,235.75 77971 RYLAND STLR CORPORATION 01/28/2026 0.00 5,827.96
77972 SCGas SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPA 01/28/2026 0.00 19.68 AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (l/28/2026 3:22 PM) Page2 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Check No Vendor No Vendor Name Check Date Void Checks Check Amount 77973 SPECTRUM CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS HOLDf 01/28/2026 0.00 1,778.35 77974 USLABS BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMERICA I 01/28/2026 0.00 45,119.00 77975 XEROXFIN XEROX CORPORATION 01/28/2026 0.00 84.73
77976 USBANK USBANK 01/28/2026 0.00 81,175.42
Report Total (108 checks): 0.00 2,115,002.18
AP Checks by Date - Summary by Check Number (l/28/2026 3:22 PM) Page 3 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Accounts Payable
Transactions by Account
User:

Printed:

Batch:

Account Number
100-0000-3202-00
100-3001-5121-01
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-572.2-00
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-5722-00
100-3001-6160-00
100-3001-6160-00
100-3001-6160-00
100-3007-5721-00
sflores
01/28/2026 - 3:25PM
00000.00.0000
AP-Transactions by Account (01/2.8/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor

LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DI
SCA OF C.ALLC

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO
SOUTHERN CALI'.FORNIAEOISO

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA.EDISO

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO

RP BARRICADE INC

UNDERGROUNDSERVICEALER

UNOERGROCJND SERVICEALER

FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC
Description GLDate
Fire District Permit Fees Oct-Dec '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Street Sweeping Svcs - Dec '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Street L!inlps - Dec '25 01/2.2/2026
Traffic Control 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
Webb Way Signal 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
Cross• Creek Rd Ped 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
Broad Beach 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
Wmter Cyn 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
St Lighting 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PW-Signs 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Dig Alerts - Pee '25 01/22/2026
Monthly Fee - Dec '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Civic Center STF - Jan '26 01/15/2026
CheckNo Amount PONo
77922 14,517.00 000004660
14,517.00
77935 11;491.20 000004404
l1;49L20
77936 17.07
77936 144.56
77936 184.60
77936 15.44
77936 29.48
77936 107.36
77936 3,274.52
3;773.03
77934 845.99
845,99
77944 158.00
77944 39.33
197.33
77875 206.97

Page 1 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-300705722-0Q
100-3008-5100-00
100-3008-5107-00
100-3008-5107-00
100-3008-5107-00
I 00-3008-5300-00
100-4001-5330-00
100-4001-5330-00
1004001-6120-00
100-4001-6160-00
1004002-6160-00
AP-Transa9tions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendoi• Descdption GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO CCSTF 1/2 - 1V28/25 01/22/2026

MNS ENGINEERS INC

APPLEONE

APPLEONE
USBANK
Vendor Subtotal:

General FEMASupport - Nov '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Temp Staff - D. Carter 12/13/25
Temp Staff - D. Carter 12/20/25
Temp Staff - D. Carter 12/6/25
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PW-3834 APWALunche.on - Oeo '25 I 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

NATIONAL RECREATION AND B NRPA Gtoup Membership FY25/26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CS-4743 CPRS - Award for Matketin~ 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CS4743 When I Work- Annual 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CS-1654 Amazon/Bluedoglnk - Suppl 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CS-6305 Amazon - Pool Cleaning Sup 01/28/2026
CheckNo
77936
77928
77898
77898
77898
77976
77882
77976
77976
77976
77976
Amount PONO
206:97
931.29
931.29
58;75 000004331

58.75 2,121:60
1,962.48
1;670.76
5,754.84
130.00
130.00
470.00
470.00

85.09 85.00
1;197,00
1;197.00
152,98
152,98

18.82 Page2
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-4003-5721-00
100-4003-6160-00
100-4006-6160-00
100-4007-5330-00
100-4007-5401-00
100-4008-5107-00
100-4008-6160-00
100-4008-6160-00
100-4010-5100-00
100-4010-5100-Ci0
100-4010-5100-00
AP-Transactiort.s by Account (01/28/2026- :i:25 PM)
Vendor Descl'iption GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK. CS-1673 Satellite Phone Store - Cham 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

USBANI{ CS-1673 CVS - Night Hike Supplies 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK. CS-4743 NCSI/Ogdens - Supplies 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

SESAC RIGHTS MANAGEMENT I Music License FY 25/26 Act#79998 01/15/2026 USBANK.

DANIELA JACOBSON
USBANK.

USBANK
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-1673 Peachjar - Malibu/Webster E 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Sr Luncheon Entertainment 1/22/26 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-4743 Amazon/Spruzzo - St. Ctr Su
CS-1563 Amazon/Michaels - Sr, Ctr S
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

AMERICAN GLOBAL SECURITY Eqtiestrian - Security Svcs - Dec '25 AMERICAN GLOBAL SECURITY Trancas - Security Svcs - Dec '25 01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MANA City Parks Landscape Maint/Liners - I 01/15/2026 CheckNo
77976
77976
77976
77885
77976
77915
77976
77976
77870
77870
77873
Amount
18,82

72.79 72.79

3.79 3.79
326.91
326.91
641.00
641.00

50.00 50.00
350.00
350.00
3,456.89
300.09
3,756,98
1,050.00
1;050.00
2,100.00
26;020.32
PONo
000004128
000004128
000004317
. Page3
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-4010-5100-00
100-4010-5121-00
100-4010-5121-00
100-4010-5610-00
100-4010-5710-00
100-4010-5721-00
100-4010-5722-00
100-4010-5722-00
100-4010-5722-00
100-4010-5722-00
100-4010-5722-00
!00-4010-5723-00
100-4010-6160-00
100-4010-6160-00
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor Descl-iption GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

ULTJMATE MAINTENANCE SER, City Parkii Ja.uitorial Svcs - Dec '25 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MANA PCH Median - Plant Installation - Dec ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MANA PCH Median - Plant Installation - Dec 01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor St1btotal:

USBANK CS-2481 Allied Hand Dry!lt - Ttancas 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

NATlONAL CONSTRUC110N RE1 Bluffs Portable Toilet 12/11/25 - 1/7/21 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC Las Flores, Bluffs, Trattcas - Jan '26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Charmlee Park - Dec '25
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Rambla Pacifico 1/2 - 12/28/25 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Bluffs Park Lift Station 1/2 - 12/28/25 SOUTHERN CALlFORNlAEDISO Community Svcs 1/2 - 12/28/25
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO PCHMedian 1/2- 12/28/25
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

LACO MALIBU TREASURER-Wl Water- Las Flores 10/14-12/ll/25Act 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK
USBANK
CS-1673 Amazon- Supplies
CS-2481 Ralphs - Equestrian Supplies
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
CheckNo
77889
77873
77873
77976
77881
77875
77936
77936
77936
77936
77936
77878
77976
77976
Amount PONo
26;020.32
3,250.00 000004018
3,250.00
1,920.00
1,923.00
3,843.00
1,195.00
1,195.00
941.10
941.10
588;69
588.69
267.63

18.62 98.67
1,105.55

17.14 1,507;61
204.58
204.58

29.49 22.03
Page4
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-4010-6300-00
100-4010-6400-00
100-4010-6400-00
100-4011-6160-00
100-4011-6160-00
100-4012-6160-00
100-4012s6160-00
100-4012-6160-00
• 100-7001-5100-00
100-7001-5104-00
100-7001-5300-00
100-7001-53'.10-00
AP-Trans119tion.s by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor
U$BANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
STLR. CORPORATION
Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-2481 Roadside Lumber/Hardware 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-7433 4Jmprint - Parle Maint. Polos
CS-2481 Dickies - Work Uniform
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-1654 Supplies
CS-4 743 Special Events - SupPlies
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CS-4743 NCSI- Malibu Arts Backgro
CS-4743 Fabulous Events - Table Clot
CS-1654 Arts Supplies
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

School District Separation - Dec '25 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CALIFORNIA STRATEGIES & AD Lobbying Svcs - Dec '25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CM-3100 Cal Cities '26-H. Conrad 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIE! Annual City Membership Dues 2026 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

Check No
77976
77976
77976
77976
77976
77976
77976
77976
77971
77903
77976
77964
Amount PONo

51.52 74.60

74.60 316.57

38.57 355.14
849.83
5,417.20
6,267.03

37.0tl
295.57
1,678.66
2,011.23
5;827,96 000003541
5,827.96
12,500.00 000003092
12,500.00
675.00
675.00
7,153:00
7,153.00
Page5
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Description GLDate Check No Amount PONo 100-7001-5930-00 MALIBU MONARCH PROJECT FY 25/26 General l:<und Grant 01/22/2026 77925 2;500.00 Vendor Subtotal: 2,500.00
100-7001-5930-04 GIMA RESTAURANT JNC Small Business Micro Stabilization Gr 01/28/2026 77960 7,500.00 Vendor Subtotal: 7;500;00
100-700ls6160-00 $1;APLES CONTRACT & COMME Office Supplies - City Council 01/15/2026 77886 41.74 Vendor Subtotal: 41.74
100-7001-6160-00 STEVE UHRJNG Reimb - Farewell Gift for C. Bond 01/22/2026 77941 364.93 Vendor Subtotal: 364.93
100-7001-6160-00 USBANK CM~:3100 Pura Vida/Papa Razzi- Cou: 01/28/2026 77976 291.36 100-7001°6160-00 U$BANK CM-8505 Scott's - Council Dinner 11/'. 01/28/2026 77976 191.17 Vendor Subtotal: 482.53
100-7002-5100-00 MAP COMMUNICATIONS INC Live Telephone Answering Svcs - Jan 01/22/2026 77896 291.79 000004376 Vendor Subtotal: 291.79
100-7002-5100-00 PEGASUS STUDIOS Video Broadcast-Svcs - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77933 11,310.00 000004427 Vendor Subtotal: 11,310.00
100-7002-5107-00 OFFICE TEAM A ROBERT HALF C Temp Staff- K. Franklin 12/12/25 01/22/2026 77895 1,235.38 100-7002-5107-00 OFFICE TEAMAROBERTHALF C Temp Staff - K. Franklin 12/26/25 01/22/2026 77895 820.00 100-7002-5107-00 OFFICE TEAM A ROBERT HALF C Temp Staff - K. Franklin 12/19/25 01/22/2026 77895 2,119.19 Vendor Subtotal: 4,174.57
100-7002-6160-00 4IMPRJNTJNC Palisades Fire I Yr Anniversary Ptotil< 01/22/2026 77893 7,283.27 000004652 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026- 3:25 PM) Page6
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor· Descl'iption GLDate Check No Amount PONo Vendor Subtotal: 7,283.27
100-7002-6160-00 USBANK CS-4743 Fal:mlous Events - Supplies 01/28/2026 77976 549.24 100-7002-6160-00 USBANK CS-2169 Mix.tiles - Palisades Fire Art , 01/28/2026 77976 1,547.30 100-7002-6160-00 USBANK CM-1480 B&H/Amazon-AV Equipm 01/28/2026 77976 465.98 Vertd<)r Subtotal: 2,562.52
100-7002-6170-00 LAURADEM!ERIFERCANO Sr Choir - Palisades Fire Anoiversary : 01/15/2026 77874 90.00 Vendor Subtotal: 90.00
100-7003-5100-00 CRUZ STRATEGIES LLC SMMUSD Separation Lobbying - Jan 01/28/2026 77955 10,000.00 000004647 Vendor Subtotal: 10,000.00
100-7003-5100-00 M PUBLIC RELATIONS INC PR Support - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77965 2,300.00 000004628 Vendor Subtotal: 2,300.00
100-7003-5105-00 TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS Th Grant Writing Svcs - Jan '26 01/22/2026 77940 6,500:00 000004075 Vendor Subtotal: 6;500.00 •
100-7003-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff - A. Cosentino 12/6/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,521.60 100-7003-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff-A. Cosentino 12/20/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,179.24 100-7003-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff - A. Cosentino 12/13/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,179.24 Vendor Subtotal: 3,880.08
100-7003-5300-00 USBANK CM-3100 Cal Cities '26 - R. Rojas/C. : 01/28/2026 77976 1;550.00 100-7003-5300-00 USBANK CM-1522 CCMF - '26 Dinner R. Rojaf 01/28/2026 77976 553.97 Vendor Subtotal: 2;103.97
100-7003-5330-00 USBANK CM-1522 CCMF - Membership R. Rq 01/28/2026 77976 400.00 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026- 3:25 PM) Page7
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-7003-6160-00
100-7003-6160-00
100-7003-6160-00
100-7005-5101-00
100-7005-5101-01
100-7005-5102-00
100-7007-5401-00
100-7007-5401-00
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5100-00
AP-Transactions by Acco~t (01/28/2026- 3:25 PM)
Vendor· Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

STAPLES CONTRACT & COMME Office Supplies • City Manager 01/15/2026 USBANK
USBANK

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
13 STARS MEDIA
1:i STARS MEDIA
Vendor Subtotal:

CM-3100 Land's End- StaffUniforms
CM-3100 Lands End/Amazon• Suppli
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

General Legal Counsel - Nov '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

School District Separation - Nov '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Litigation - Nov '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Legal Notice - Ordinance 529 12/4/25
Legal Notice - Ordinance No. 531 121:
01/15/2026
01/28/2026
Vend9t Subtotal:

ATLAS PLANNING SOLUTIONS Saftey Element Update - Dec '25 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

ALLISON COOK Safety Element • Dec '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CONSTANT AND ASSOCIATES II' City Evacuation Plan Update • Dec '25 01/28/2026 Check No
77886
77976
77976
77900
77900
77900
77869
77949
77951
77906
77957
Amount PONo
400.00
339.42
339.42
281.51
161.67
443.18
30,537.00 000004588
30,537.00
5,957.10 00000458$
5;957.10
89,602.94 000004588
89,602,94

64.26 58.14
122.40
4,720.00 000004545
4;720;00
123.75 000004334
123.75
11;045;65 000004610.

Page8
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5100-00
100-7021-5115-00
100-7021-5115-00
100-7021-5ll9-00
100-7021-5122-00
100-7021-5640-00
100-7021-5721-00
100-7021-5721-00
AP-Transactions by Account {01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor

STEVEN GUTIERREZ

STEVEN GUTIERREZ
Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

Parking Enforcement Hearings - Dec •:

Parking Enforcement Heatings - Jan '2
01/22/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES LA-R LARICS Radios - Dec '25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

WITT OBRIENS LLC After-Action Re,.iew - Franklin/Palisa 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

LA CO SHERJFF'S DEPARTMENT Sheriff's Svcs - Lost Hills - Dec '25 LA CO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Sheriff's Svcs - Malibu HS Homecomi 01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

TII PEOPLE CONCERN Homeless Outreach - Nov '25 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

LAZ KARP ASSOCIATES LLC Parking Enforcement - Dec '25 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO Tier 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC Disastl:r, Tier, E911 - Jan '26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

REMOTE SATELLITE SYSTEMS l Satellite Phones - Feb '26 01/28/2026 Check No
77912
77961
77923
77948
77962
77962
77967
77963
77936
77875
77969
Amount
11,045.65
900.00
175.00
1,075.00
600.00
600.00
51,190.00
51,190.00
909,182.26
565.34
909,747.60
25,625.00
25,625.00
45,499.77
45,499.77
149.65
149,65
386.39
386.39
268.00
PONo
000004374
000004374
000004646
000004609
000004586
000004586
000003783
000004318
Page9
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Description GLDate Check No Amount PONo Vendor Subtotal: 268.00
100-7021-5721-00 USBANK IS-6901 Starlink- CH/PSNOP 01/28/2026 77976 1,000.00 Vendor Subtotal: 1,000.00
100-7021-6120-00 USBANK PS-3241 OpenAI/Veribook- Monthly 01/28/2026 77976 44.64 Vendor Subtotal: 44.64
100-7021-6160-00 USBANK PS-3241 Vista Print - EOC Signs 01/28/2026 77976 168.69 100-7021-6160-00 USBANK PS-3241 Supplies 01/28/2026 77976 3,825.61 100-7021-6160-00 USBANK IS-6901 DitectTV - EOC/PS 01/28/2026 77976 190.98 100-7021-6160-00 USBANK PS-3241 Ironwear - Shipping 01/28/2026 77976 11.68 100-7021-6160-00 USBANK PS-3241 Ironwear - Cert Vests 01/28/2026 77976 27;00 I 00-7021-6160-00 USBANK PS-2785 Lion Group- Fite Extinguish 01/28/2026 77976 796.52 Vendor Subtotal: 5,020.48
100-7021-6160-01 OC MOUNTS LLC VOP Vehicle Equipment - Recertified' 01/28/2026 77966 2,311.24 Vendor Subtotal: 2,311.24
I 00-7054-5100-00 GOVERNMENTAL FINANCIAL SJ CPA Svcs - FY 24/25 Year End - Dec ' 01/22/2026 77911 5,197.50 000004320 Vendor Subtotal: 5;197;50
100-7054-5100-00 HlNDERLIIBR DE LLAMAS & At Sales Tax/ A-qdit Svcs - Q2/2025 (Oct-] 01/22/2026 77913 1,465.67 000003107 Vendor Subtotal: 1,465.67
l 00-7054-6160-00 STAPLES CONTRACT & COMME Office Supplies - Finance 01/15/2026 77886 55.13 Vendor Subtotal: 55.13
I 00-7054-6160-00 USBANK AS-6486 Amazon - Supplies 01/28/2026 77976 22 .. 17 AP0Transa!ltions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM) Page 10 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-7058-5100-0I
I 00-7058-5300-00
I 00-7058-5320-00
I 00-7058-5320-00
I 00-7058-5'.320-00
I 00-7058-5320-00
I 00-7058-532.0-00
100-7058-6170-00
I 00-7058-6170-00
100-7059-5107-00
100-7059-5205-00
100-7059-5640-00
AP-Transaction.s by Account (01/2.8/2016- 3 :25 PM)
Vendor
USBANK

USBANK,
USBANK
USBANK
~CPINC

WBCPINC

WBCPINC
USBANK
USBANK

APPLEONE
Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

HR-4710 Ralphs - Kaiser Clinic Event 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

HR-5582 CALPERLA Training - A. F: 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

HR-5582 Ralph&Careern Gov - Recrui
HR.-4 710 Recruitment Ads
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

City Manager Recruitment - Pymt 3 oJ
City Manager Recruitment - Pymt 1 oJ
City Manager Recruitment - Pymt 2 oJ
01/22/2026
01/2:2/2026
01/2.2/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

I-lR-5582 Costco - Employee Training
CS-1654ComerBakery- CityStaff:M
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Temp Staff - S. Parna 12/13/25 01/2112026
Vendor Subtotal:

QUADIENT FINANCE USA INC Postage 12/23/25 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

EXCEL OFFICE SERVICES Copier Maint II/17 - 12/16/25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

Check No
77976
77976
77976
77976
77946
77946
77946
77976
77976
77898
77968
77908
Amount PONo

22.17 36.07

36.07 475.00
475.00
385.26
2,325.00
2,710.26
10,623.97 000004661
14,121.93 000004661
9,686.97 000004661
34,432.87
330.25
1;434,00
1,764,25
1,166.56
1,166.56
1;000,00
1,000.00
580.35
580.35
Page II
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
100-7059-5721-00
100-7059-5721-00
100-7059-5721-00
100-7059-5721-00
100-7059-5721-00
100-7059-5800-00
100-7059~6160-00
100-7059-6160-00
100-7059-6160-00
100-7059-6160-00
101-0000~3208-00
101-0000-3416-00
AP-Transa<itions by Account (01/28/2026- j:25 PM)
Vendor

FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC

FRONTIER CALIFORNIAJNC

T-MOBILE USA INC
Description
Bluffs Park Wifi 12/17 /25 - 1/16/26
City Hall Facility - Jan '26
Bluffs Park 2nd Wifi - Jan '26
GLDate
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Phones/Tablets - Fire Safety 11/21 - 1~ 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

VE.RIZON WlRELESS SERVICES l Cell Phone Svc 11/24 - lif2jf25 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

US BANK NATIONALASSOCIA11 Toshiba Leases 12/15/25 - 1/15/26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

STAPLES CONTRACT & COMME O:ffi.ce Supplies - Non Departmental 01/15/2026 USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
Vertdot Subtotal:

AS-7465 Amazon - Fraudulent Charge
HR-4710 Amazon - Electric Kettle for
IS-6901 Amazon- Supplies
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CheckNo
77g75
77875
77875
77887
77890
77888
77886
77976
77976
77976
Subtotal for Section l : 100
JUSTIN BERANICI-I Ref - Electrical Fees 25-0870,. 23402 ~ 01/22/2026 77902 Vendor Subtotal:

MALIBU SEAFOOD INC Ref - Code Enf Pee #202010003, 2565 01/22/2026 77926 Vendor Subtotal:

Amount PONo
149.49
232.12
218.11
599.72
1,105.54
1;105.54
6,479.28
6,479.28
4;404.70
4;404.70
507.69
507.69

19.05 19.54
343.08
391.67
1,429,586.49
129.00
129,00
380.00
380.00

Page 12 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Descl'iption GLDate Check No Amount PONO 101-0000-3419-00 GOLDIN INDUSTRJES INC Ref - Credit Card Fees 01/22/2026 77910 6.10 Vendor Subtotal: 6.10
101-0000-3419-00 NITZANNUN Ref - Credit Card Fees 01/22/2026 77930 6.10 Vendor Subtotal: 6.10
101-0000-3421-00 GOLDIN INDUSTRIES INC Ref - Planning Fees OC 25-258, 2971' 01/22/2026 77910 200.00 Vendor Subtotal: 200.00
101-0000C3421-00 NITZANNUN Ref - Planning Fees PA 25-012; 5480 I 01/22/2026 77930 200.00 Vendor Subtotal: 200.00
101-2001-5100-00 4LEAFINC Planning Svcs - Nov '25 01/22/2026 77894 24,390.00 000004387 Vendor Subtotal: 24,390.00
101-2001-5100-00 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC Contract Planning - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77952 18,195.00 000004413 Vendor Subtotal: 18;195,00
101-2001-5100-00 CALIFORNIA COASTAL WORKS Planning Svcs - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77905 1,711.00 000004395 Vendor Subtotal: 1,711.00
101-2001-5100-00 ALLISON COOK Planning Svcs - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77906 11,096.25 000004394 Vendor Subtotal: 11,096.25
101-2001-5100-00 COTfON SHJRES & ASSOCTJITE~ Planning Svcs - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 382.00 000004314 Vendor Subtotal: 382.00
101-2001-5100-00 CSG CONSULTANTS lNC Contract Planning Svc 11/29- 12/26/2 01/28/2026 77956 3,349.50 000004418 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026- 3:25 Pl\1) Page 13 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendm· Descl'iption GLDate Check No Amount PONo Vendor Subtotal: 3;349.50
101-2001-5100-00 JOYCE PARKER-BOZYLINSKI Planning Svcs - Oct to Dec '25 01/22/2026 77932 5,130.00 000004352 Vendor Subtotal: 5,130.00
101-2001-5100-00 MARINA SEK Contract Planning - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77937 12,432:00 000004360 Vendor Subtotal: 12,432.00
101-2001-5210-00 LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECOR CEQAFiling- 29851 Pacilio Coast m 01/22/2026 77917 75.00 101-2001-5210-00 LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECOR CEQA Filing- 30051 Andromeda Ln - 01/22/2026 77918 75.00 101-2001-5210-00 LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECOR CEQAFiling -30051 Andromeda .Ln - 01/22/2026 77919 75.00 101-2001-5210-00 LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECOR CEQA Filing - 5940 Paseo Canyon Dr 01/22/2026 77920 75.00 101-2001-5210-00 LA COUNTY REGISTRAR-RECOR CEQA Filing - 6956 Dume Dr - APR : 01/22/2026 77921 75.00 Vendor Subtotal: 375.00
101:2001-5300-00 COURTNEY BROWN APA Conference '25 - C. Brown 0lM/2026 77871 104.80 Vendor Subtotal: 104.80
101-2001-5330-00 USBANK CDD-5265 Zoom-Montbly/Planetizen- 01/28/2026 77976 215;71 Vendor Subtotal: 215.71
101-2001-5340-00 COURTNEY BROWN APA Conference '25 - C. Brown 01/15/2026 77871 431.90 Vendor Subtotal: 431.90
101-2001-5401-00 13 STARS MEDIA Legal Notice - Public Hearing 21-Day 01/15/2026 77869 76.50 101-2001-5401-00 13 STARS MEDIA Legal Notice - Public Hearing 21-Day 01/15/2026 77869 183'60 Vendor Subtotal: 260.10 ·
101-2004-5100-00 COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES Geo/Coastal Engr Guideline - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 668.50 000004314 101-2004-5100-00 COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES EH Counter Houts - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 32,134.75 000004314 IO 1-2004-5100-00 COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES B&S Misc - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 668,50 000004314 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - :3:25 PM) Page 14 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Description GLDate Check No Amount PONo 101-2004-5100-00 COTION SHIR.ES & ASSOCIATES Geo/Coastal Engr Counter Hours - De, 01/28/2026 77954 38;486.50 000004314 101-2004-5100-00 COTION SHIR.ES & ASSOCIATE~ Geotech Reviews - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 41,197.50 000004314 101-2004-5100-00 COTTON SHIR.ES & ASSOCIATE~ Coastal Engr Reviews - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77954 3,728.00 000004314 Vendor Subtotal: 116,883.75
101-2004-5100-00 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AS~ Coastal Vulnerability - Through 11/30, 01/28/2026 77959 3,360.25 000003504 Vendor Subtotal: 3,360.25
101-2004-5100-00 BUREAUVERlTAS NORTH AMEi Onsite Permit Tech - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77974 20,874.00 000004398 101-2004-5100-00 BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMEl bnsite Plans Examiner - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77974 13,845.00 000004398 101-2004-5100-00 BUREAU VERITAS NORTH AMEl On.site Inspections - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77974 10,400.00 000004398 Vendor Subtotal: 45,119.00
101-2004-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff -,G, Medrano 12/13/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,559.46 101-2004-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff- G, Medrano 12/6/25 01/22/2026 77898 1;521.60 101-2004-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff - G, Medrano 12/20/25 01/22/2026 77898 1;217.28 Vendor Subtotal: 4,298.34
101-2004-5210-00 DEPT OF CONSERVATION Strong Motion/Seismic Hazard Mappii 01/28/2026 77958 14,000.20 000004662 Vendor Subtotal: 14,000.20
101-2004,5300-00 USBANK CDD-5265 SEAOC - Y. Buundy Regi, 01/28/2026 77976 470.00 Vendor Subtotal: 470.00
101-2004-5330-00 USBANK CDD-0241 ASCE - A. Ketchedjian Re 01/28/2026 77976 652.00 Vendor Subtotal: 652.00
IO 1-2004-6160-00 STAPLES CONIRACT & COMME Office Supplies - Bldg Safety 01/15/2026 77886 74.37 10 l-2004-6160-00 STAPLES CONTRACT & COMME Office Supplies - Bldg Safety 01/15/2026 77886 284.97 Vendor Subtotal: 359.34
AP-Transa9tions by Ac9ount (01/28/2026- 3:25 PM) Page 15 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
101-2004-6160-00
101-2004-6400-00
101-2010-5100-00
101-2010-5300-00
101-2012-6400-00
101-3003-5100-00
101-3003-5100-00
101-3003-6160-00
102-3002-5100-02
102-3002-5100-03
102-3002-5100-03
102-3002-5100-03
AP-Transactions by Acoowit{Ol/28/2026- 3:25 PM)
Vendor Description GLDate
USBANK CDD-7736 Amazon - Supplies 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

SMASHATHLETICS INC Bldg Inspector - Polos/Jackets 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

COTION SHIRES & ASSOCIATES EH Reviews - Dec '25 01/28/2026 USBANK
USBANK

RINCON CONSULTANTS INC

RINCON CONSULTANTS INC
USBANK
4LEAF1NC
Vendor Subtotal:

CDD-5265 NAWT- D. Garza Renewa 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CDD-0241 Rush Order Tees - Code Et 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

On-Call Enviromnental Svcs TS - Dec
On-Call ),:nvirollli:lental Svcs - Dec '25
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendot Subtotal:

CDD-7736 Amazon - Supplies 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 101
WF Planning Svcs - Nov '25 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES WF Geotech Reviews - Dec '25 COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATES WF EH Review - Dec '25
COTTON SHIRES & ASSOCIATm WF Counter Houts - Dec '25
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
CheckNo
77976
77938
77954
77976
77976
77970
77970
77976
77894
77954
77954
77954
Amount
308.86
308.86
926.49
926.49
22,496.00
22,496.00
100.00
100.00
1,084.86
1,084.86
46,811.00
38,123.00
84;934.00

83.93 83.93
374,071.48
12;180,00
12,180,00
13,031.50
2,335.50
5,154,75
PONo
000004314
000004337
000004337
000004387
000003347
000003347
000003347

Page 16 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
102-3101-5120-01
102-'.3101-5120-01
102-3102-5100-00
102-3102-5100-00
102-3102-5100°04
102-3102-5107-00
102-3102-5107-00
102-3102-5107-00
102-3102-5640-00
102-3102-5721-00 ·
102-3102-6160-00
AP-Transaction.s by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

BADGER bAYLIGiiTING CORP Franklin Fire - Ditch Debris Removal 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

CLEAN HARBORS ENVIltONMEI Franklin Fire Hazardous Waste 3/6/25 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP Fite Disaster Response - Nov '25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

UCTIMATE MAINTENANCE SER1 Rebuild Ctr Janitorial Svcs - Jan '26 0l/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOC INC Task 4: HMGP Grant Support - Nov '2 01/22/2026

APPLEONE

XEROX CORPORATION

FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC

PAULETTE MARDIKIAN
Vendor Subtotal:

Temp Staff-K. Leonard 12/13/25
Temp Staff - K. Leonard 12/6/25
Temp Staff - K. Leonard 12/20/25
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Rebuild Ctr - Xerox Meter Read 11/21 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Phone - Rebuild Ctr 12/26/25 - 1/25/21 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Reimb - Ralphs/Starbucks for Rebuild 01/22/2026
Check No
77899
77953
77900
77943
77916
77898
77898
77898
77975
77875
77927
Amount PONo
20;521.75
2,365.90
2,365.90
7,016.98 000004466
7,016.98
10,627.80 000004588
10,627.80
1,900.00 000004465
1,900.00
4,987.50 000004356
4,987.50
l,52L60
1,445.52
1,217.28
4,184.40

84.73 84,73
234.57
234.57

71.96

Page 17 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
I 02-3102-6160-00
102-3102-6160-00
103-9050-5100-00
103-9050-5100-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050a5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-5610-00
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor
USBANK
USBANK
Description GLDate
Vendor Subtotal:

CDD-7736 Amazon - Rebuild Ctr Sup
CDD-5265Costco - RebuildChristma
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Check No
77976
77976
Subtotal for Section 1: 102
ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MANA City Hall Landscape Maint - Dec '25 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

ULTIMATE MAINTENANCE SER1 City Hall Janitorial Svcs - Jart '25 01/15/2026 ANAWALT LUMBER CO lNC

ANAWALT LUMBER CO INC
City Hall - Grate & Screws
City Hall - Togglebolts
Fire Alarm Troubleshoot
Vendor Subtotal:
01/22/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

BEAR CONTRACTORS lNC
BEAR CONTRACTORS INC Alarm Monitoring - Jan to Mar '26
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
BlJRNS PACIFIC CONSTRUCTIOl City Hall - Block Wall Repair MASTER COOLING CORPORATit City Hall HVAC Repairs
MASTER COOLlNGCORPORATit City Hall HVAC Repairs
Vendor Subtotal:
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

MOSSER PLUMBING & HEATINC City Hall - Sewer Siillke & Camera 12. 01/15/2026 77873
77889
77897
77950
77901
77901
77872
77879
77879
77880
Amount PONo

71.96 576.38
262.04
838.42
65;014.01
1,094.81 000004317
1,094.81
4,149.23 000004018
4,149.23

11.66 5A8

17.14 850.00
255;00
1;105,00
1,531.74
1,531.74
957,00
927.97
1,884.97
322.50

Page 18 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
103-9050-5610-00
103-9050-56 l 0-00
103-9050-5721-00
103-9050-5722-00
103-9050-5725-00
103-9050-6160-00
103-9050-6160-00
103-9050-6160-00
103-9050-6300-00
103-9050-6300-00
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - :i:25 PM)
Vendor. Descl-iption GLDate
MOSSER PLUMBING & HEATIN( D/S Kitchen - Ice Machine Plumbing 01/22/2026 Vendor Snbtotal:

USBANK AS-7465 Amazon - Fae Maint 01/28/2026
Vendor Snbtotal:

FRONTIER CALlFORNlAlNC City Hall Septic, Fire Line - Jan '26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALlFORNlA EDISO City Hall 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026

GI INDUSTRIES

HDSUPPLYINC

HD SUPPLY INC
USBANK

ULINEINC
USBANK
Vendor Subtotal:

Garbage - City Hall Green Waste - Jan 01/15/2026
City Hall - Janitorial Supplies
City Hall - Janitorial Supplies
Vendor Subtotal:
01/15/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

AS-7465 Amazon/Staples - Supplies 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Cart Dolly 01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

AS-7465 Amazon - Tools & Minor Eq 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 103
CheckNo
77929
77976
77875
77936
77876
77877
77914
77976
77942
77976
Amount PONo
590.56
913.06
211.47
211.47
355.31
355.31
9,459.84
9,459.84

74.57 74.57
314.11
208.15
522.26
329.90
329.90
351.55
351.55
378.45
378.45
22,379.30

Page 19 ends

Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Desc1iption GLDate Check No Amount PONo 105-9088-5100-00 FREDERICK FISHER & PARTNER Community Lands Concept Design 01/22/2026 77909 34,450.00 000004656 Vendor Subtotal: 34,450.00
Subtotal for Section 1 : 105 34,450.00
207-3004-5100-00 SOLID WASTE SOLUTIONS lNC AB 939/Cal Recycle - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77939 1;616,50 000004074 Vendor Subtotal: 1;616.50
207-3004-5100-01 SOLID WASTE SOLUTIONS INC Dumpster Lid Enforcement - Dec '25 01/22/2026 77939 - 10,353.00 000004074 Vendor Subtotal: 10,353.00
207-3004-5850-00 SOLID WASTE SOLUTIONS lNC SB 1383 GrantCalRecycle-Dec '25 01/22/2026 77939 398.00 Vendor Subtotal: 398.00
Subtotal for Section 1: 207 12,367.50
211-7021-5115-00 LA CO SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT Sheriff's Svcs - Brulte - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77962 24,694.95 000004586 Vendor Subtotal: 24,694.95
Subtotal for Section 1: 211 24,694.95
215-7070-5931-01 MALIBU COMMUNITY LABORE CDBG Day Labor Exchange - Sep '25 01/22/2026 77924 663.00 000004614 215-7070-5931-01 MALIIlU COMMUNITY LABORE CDBG Day Labor Exchange - Oct '25 01/22/2026 77924 663.00 000004614 215-7070-5931-01 MALIBU COMMUNITY LABORE CDBG Day Labor Exchange - Nov '25 01/22/2026 77924 663.00 000004614 Vendor Subtotal: 1,989.00
215-7070-7800-00 WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC Temp Office Ttailet 12/28/25 - l /27/2 01/22/2026 77947 2,278.77 215-7070-7800-00 WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN INC MCLE Restroom Trailer - Tank 12/23/ 01/22/2026 77947 1;036.35 215-7070-7800-00 WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN lNC MCLE Restroom Trailer - Toilet 12/24 01/22/2026 77947 6,783.21 AP-Transactions by Ail¢ount (01/28/2026- 3:25 PM) Page20 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
290-6002-5722-00
290-6002-5722-00
291-6003-5722-00
292-6004-5722-00
292-6004-5722-00
310-9066-5100-00
310-9066-5100-00
310-9066-5100-00
310-9090-5100-00
310-9090-5100-00
AP-Transactions by Account(Ol/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor Desciiption GLDate Check No
Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Big Rock Inland Pump 1/2 - 12/28/25 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Asmt Dist Big Rock 1/2 - 12/28/25 Subtotal for Section 1: 215
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1 : 290
SOUTHERN CALIFORNlAEDISO Asmt dst Malibu Rd 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Asmt Dist Rambla-Calle 1/2 - 12/28/2:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO Calle Del Barco 1/2 - 12/28/25 Subtotal for Section 1: 291
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALtFORNlAEDISO 22878 1/4 PCB 11/17 - 12/16/25 SOU"tHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO 21033 l/2 PCB Svc Connection 11/17 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 23035 1/4 PCB 9/17 - 12/16/25 Subtotal for Section 1: 292
01/15/2026
01/15/2026 •
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

EARTHCAM INC

EARTHCAM INC
89290 - Skate Park Camera Software 1
89290 c Skate Park Camera Rental 1/1
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 310
77936
77936
77936
77936
77936
77884
77884
77884
77907
77907
Amount PONo
10;098.33
12,087.33

43.13 723.33
766.46
766.46

77.07 77.07

77.07 20.64

15.44 36.08

36.08 33.83
233.94

18.52 286.29
550.00
282.75
832.75
1,119.04
Page21
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
500-7008-5100-00
500-7008-5722-00
500-7008-5722-00
500-7008-6160-00
515-3010-5656-00
515-:3010-5721-00
515-3010-5722-00
515-3010-5722-00
515-3010-5724-00
515-3010-5725-00
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendor· Descdption GLDate CheckNo
ENHANCED LANDSCAPE MAN/\ Legacy Park Landscape Maint/Liners • 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ED ISO Legacy Park Lift Station 1/2 - 12/28/2: 01/22/2026 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISO 23661 PCH 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

USBANK CS-1563 Wall Decor Superstore -Sup] 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 500
RINCON CONSULTANTS lNC CCWTF Water Quality Monitoring - I 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

FRONTIER CALIFORNIAJNC Phone - CCWTF 12/8/25 - 1/7/26 01/15/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAEDISO Injection Wells/CCWTF 1/2-12/28/2'.

SOUTHERN CALIFORN1AEDISO CCWTF 1/2- 12/28/25
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

SOUTI-IERN CALIFORNIA GAS C CCWTF Gas 12/4/25 - 1/6/26 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

GI INDUSTRIES Garbage - CCWTF - Jan '26 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 515
77873
77936
77936
77976
77970
77875
77936
77936
77972
77876
Amount PONO
17,219.76 000004317
17,219.76
1,070.12
771.05
1,84L17
464.00
464.00
19,524.93
7,301.75 000004135
7,301.75
435.20
435.20
384;28
12,815.99
13,200.27

19.68 19,68
243.23
243.23
21,200.13
Page22
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Description GLDate Check No Amount PONo 601-3005-5722-00 SOUTIIERN CALIFORNIAEDISO Electric Car Charger 1/2 - 12/28/25 01/22/2026 77936 465.48 Vendor Subtotal: 465.48
601-3005-6120-00 USBANK PW-8679 Ford Pro - GPS Monthly 01/28/2026 77976 480.00 Vendor Subtotal: 480.00
601-3005-6500-00 USBANK PW-9093 Chevron- Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 186.48 601-3005-6500-00 USBANK CS-2481 Chevron - Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 392.41 601-300,5°6500-00 USBANK CS-7433 Shell - Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 93.99 601-3005-6500-00 USBANK CS-1654 Chevron - Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 77.58 '601-3005-6500-00 USBANK CS-1673 Chevron - Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 216.54 601-3005-6500-00 USBANK PW-8679 Shell - Fleet Fuel 01/28/2026 77976 81.35 601-3005-6500-00 USBANK PW-1571 Speedway Express - Fleet Fi 01/28/2026 77976 70.53 Vendor Subtotal: 1,118.88
Subtotal for Section I: 601 2;064.36
602-7060-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff - C. Gintz 12/6/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,821.60 602-7060-5107-00 APPLEONE Temp Staff- C. Gintz 12/13/25 01/22/2026 77898 1,753.29 Vendor Subtotal: 3,574.89
602-7060-5721-00 FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC Fiber Optics Svcs 12/15/25 - 1/14/26 01/15/2026 77875 810,00 602-7060-5721 aOO FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC City Hall Fae, Internet - Jan '26 01/15/2026 77875 436.19 602-7060-5721-00 FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC City Hall Internet 12/27/25 - 1/26/26 01/15/2026 77875 1;605.44 602-7060-5721-00 FRONTIER CALIFORNIA INC City Hall Internet 12/14/25 - 1/13/26 01/15/2026 77875 1,015,85 Vendor Subtotal: 3,867.48
602-7060-5721-00 USBANK IS-9039 Amazon - Computer Supplies 01/28/2026 77976 251.08 602-7060-5721-00 USBANK IS-690 I Stat link - IT 01/28/2026 77976 moo Vendor Subtotal: 261.08
602-7060-6120-00 USBANK IS-6901 Computer Software 01/28/2026 77976 14,639.81 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM) Page23 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Numbel'
602-7060-6120-00
602-7060-6120-00
602-7060-6120°00
602-7060-6400-00
602-7060-7400-00
602-7060-7400-00
602-7060-7400-00
602-7060-7800-00
710-0000-2270-44
mi-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
710-0000-2270-56
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM)
Vendol'
USBANK
USBANK
Desc1iption
IS-9039 Computer Software
AS-6486 Microsoft Svcs - Software St
GLDate
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

FLEXENTIAL COLORADO CORP Server Colocation - Jan '26 01/15/2026 USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
USBANK
Vendot Subtotal:

IS-6901 Amazon - IT Clothing 01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

IS-6901 Computer Equipment
IS-9039 Amazon/.Xbyte - Computer E,
IS-6901 Computer Equipment
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
01/28/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

CHARTER COMMUNICATIO.NS I Bluffs Park Secl!Iity Camera Network/ 01/28/2026 Vendor Subtotal:

Check No
77976
77976
77891
77976
77976
77976
77976
77973
Subtotal for Section 1: 602

ENID OSBORN

RICHARD COMI

RICHARD COMI
Poetry- Caffeinated Verse 1/10/26 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Review ofWRP 22-009, 5900.5 Trane
Review ofWRP 23-007, 21971.5 PCH
Review of WP 23-007, 3401.5 Serra R
Review ofWRP23-001, 28815 .. 5 lfao
Review ofWRP 23-003, 7101.5 Fernh
Review ofWRP 23-010, 22002.5 Carl,
Review ofWP23-001, 3560.5 Serra R
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
01/22/2026
Vendor Subtotal:
77883
77904
77904
77904
77904
77904
77904
77904
Amount PONo
4;992.98
4,643.10
24,275.89
3,718.59
3,718.59
527.35
527.35
296.36
2;216.51
12;981.22
15;494.09
1,778.35
1,77K35
53,497.72
2;700,00
2,700,00
150.00
150.00
150.00
150.00
150.00
150.00 -
150,00
1;050,00
Page24
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number Vendor Descr-iption GLDate CheckNo Amount PONo 710-0000-2270-57 PACIFIC PRODUCTION SERVICE Ref- Film Permit Bond No. 25-164 01/22/2026 77931 1;000.00 Vendor Subtotal: 1,000.00
710-0000-2271-29 CSG CONSULTANTS INC Tranoas Water Taruc - Dec '25 01/28/2026 77956 460.00 000004418 Vendor Subtotal: 460.00
Subtotal for Section I: 710 5;210.00
713-0000-1015-00 USBANKN.A. AD 2010-1 Broad Breach Undergroun 01/22/2026 77945 36,090.00 Vendor Subtotal: 36,090.00
Subtotal for Section 1 : 713 36,090.00
900-0000-2040-00 CalPERS Retirement PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PERS Addi I 01/15/2026 0 83.64 900-0000~2040-00 CalPERS Retirement PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PERS EESh1 01/15/2026 0 12,033.09 900-0000-2040-00 CalPERS Retirement PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PEPRAAddl 01/15/2026 0 49.61 Vendor Subtotal: 12;166.34
900-0000-2040-0l Ca!PERS Retirement PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PERS ERSh, 01/15/2026 0 23,000.39 900-0000-2040-01 CalPERS Retirem:ertt PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PEPRAER < 01/15/2026 0 25,20558 Vendor Subtotal: 48,205,97
900-0000-2040-02 CalPERS Retirement PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PEPRAEE C 01/15/2026 0 25,144,61 Vendor Subtotal: 25,144.61
900-0000-2041-00 USBANK PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PARS - ER f 01/15/2026 77892. 132.66 900-0000-2041-00 USBANK PR Batch 70015.01.2026 PARS - EE S 01/15/2026 77892 632.67 Vendor Subtotal: 765.33
900-0000-2042-00 EMPOWER RETIREMENT LLC PR Batch 70015.01.2026 457 ltetirem, 01/15/2026 0 3,600.00 900-0000-2042-00 EMPOWER RETIREMENT LLC PR Batch 70015.01.2026 457 Retirem, 01/15/2026 0 1,737.95 AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 PM) Page 25 Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F Account Number
900-0000-2042-00
900-0000-2042-00
900-0000-2042-00
900-0000-2042-0l
900-0000-2043-00
900-0000-2050-00
900-0000-2051-00
900-0000-2053-00
900-0000-2053-00
AP-Transactions by Account (01/28/2026 - 3:25 Plvf)
Vendor
EMPOWER RETIRElvlENT LLC

EMPOWER RETIREMBNT LLC
EMPOWER RETIREJv1ENT LLC

EMPOWER RETIREMENT LLC

EMPOWER RETIREMENT LLC
Federal Taxes from PR
State of California PR Taxes
Federal Taxes from PR
Federal Taxes from PR
Description GLDate Check No
PR Batch 70015.01.2026 457 Rctirem,
PR Batch 70015.01.2026 Roth-457 Re
PR Batch 70015.01.2026 Roth-457 Re
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PR Batch 70015.01.2026 457 Loan Pr< 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PR Batch 70015.01.2026 401 Retirem, 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PR Batch 70015.01.2026 Federal Inco: 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PR Batch 70015.01.2026 State Iilcomt 01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

PR Batch 70015.01.2026 Medicare Ell
PR Batch 70015.01.2026 Medicare El'
01/15/2026
01/15/2026
Vendor Subtotal:

Subtotal for Section 1: 900
Report Total:

Report Total:
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Less: Clearing House Electronic AP Proof List 00001.01.2026 Transactions By Account Total:

Amount
11;185.00
300.00
1,305.52
18,128.47
947.51
947.51
1,000.00
1,000.00
64,469.61
64;469.61
26,727.03
26,727.03
7,255.68
7,255.68
14,511.36
212,066.23
2,326,303.0S
2,326,303.08
(211,300.90)
PONo
2,115,002.18
Page26
Docusign Envelope ID: C29D240C-D4BE-4D07-B35A-C78010A5E35F

Page 1 of 1 ends

Agenda Item # 1.B.3.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Kelsey Pettijohn, City Clerk
Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: January 28, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2026 Subject: Approval of Minutes
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the minutes for the July 10, 2025 Special Meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: N/A.

DISCUSSION: Staff has prepared draft minutes for the City Council meeting on July 10, 2025. The draft minutes were originally presented at the January 26, 2026 Regular Meeting, but approval was continued to the February 9, 2026 Regular Meeting to allow staff to correct a typographical error.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. July 10, 2025 Special Meeting
City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

1.B.3.
1 MINUTES

MALIBU CITY COUNCIL

SPECIAL MEETING
JULY 10, 2025

COUNCIL CHAMBERS
9:00 A.M.

MEETING CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Riggins called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m.

ROLL CALL
The following persons were recorded in attendance by the Recording Secretary:

PRESENT: Mayor Marianne Riggins; Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Silverstein (arrived at 9:20 a.m.); and Councilmembers Haylynn Conrad, Doug Stewart and Steve Uhring.

ALSO PRESENT: Trevor Rusin, Interim City Attorney; Kelsey Pettijohn, City Clerk; and Christina Muñoz, Deputy City Clerk

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Riggins led the Pledge of Allegiance.

PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Riggins opened the floor to public comment.

Speakers: Anne K.

REPORT ON POSTING OF AGENDA
City Clerk Pettijohn reported that the agenda for the meeting was properly posted on July 8, 2025.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION Councilmember Uhring moved, and Councilmember Stewart seconded a motion to approve the agenda. The motion carried 4-0, Mayor Pro Tem Silverstein absent.

RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
At 9:16 p.m., the Council recessed to Closed Session to discuss the following items listed on the Closed Session agenda:

Personnel Matters pursuant to Government Code Section 54957:

1. Public Employee Appointment
Title: City Manager
2 Malibu City Council
Minutes of July 10, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

_________________________
Conference with Labor Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6:

1. City representative: Interim City Attorney Trevor Rusin Unrepresented employee: City Manager
The Council reconvened at 2:39 p.m. with all Councilmembers present.

CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Interim City Attorney Rusin reported that the meeting convened at 9:00 a.m., after which time the City Council recessed to a Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 and 54957.6, with all Councilmembers present. He stated the Council discussed the items on the Closed Session agenda and took no reportable action.

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Riggins adjourned the meeting at 2:40 p.m.

Approved and adopted by the City Council of the
City of Malibu on __________.
_________________________________
MARIANNE RIGGINS, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
3

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item # 1.B.4.

Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Kristin Riesgo, Community Services Director Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: January 21, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2026 Subject: Park Enhancement and Donation Program
RECOMMENDED ACTION: At the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission, approve revisions to the Park Enhancement and Donation Program.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: N/A.

DISCUSSION: In 2011, Council reviewed and approved the Park Enhancement and Beautification Program (Program) for City parks and facilities. The Program outlines guidelines for accepting private donations, as well as options for the public to purchase memorial benches, memorial rocks, and trees to add at various City parks.

In 2018, Council approved modifications to the Program that limited the number of memorial items in each park, based on a recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission determined limits based on park space and amenities.

Additional requests for native trees, planting, and gardens were promoted as “acceptable items” over memorial benches. The Program also included language allowing requests for memorial items or enhancements exceeding the maximum limit, provided they were reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by Council.

At the Regular meeting on October 21, 2025, the Commission reviewed the Program and recommended the following modifications, as well as an option to add the Malibu Skate Park to the Program.
• Add donation options at the Malibu Skate Park and Charmlee Wilderness Park • Allow memorial plaques on the picnic tables at Malibu Bluffs Park City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

1.B.4.
1

Page 2 of 2 ends

Agenda Item # 1.B.4.
• Create a new application process, which would include questions about memorial items, such as the individual’s connection to Malibu and why the park location is important to the family
• Create a new park donation agreement that emphasizes the seven (7) year timeframe that the City will keep the donation at the park site • Create a minimum donation requirement of $2,000. Donations would be higher based on the direct costs of materials, installation, and maintenance • Following the initial seven (7) year period, the cost to keep a memorial item or plaque for an additional seven (7) year period(s) will require donors to pay 50% of the original donation amount
• The Parks and Recreation Commission would review the park enhancement and donation requests at a Regular meeting
Additionally, the Commission recommended retaining all existing memorial items at the parks and requested that staff work with all families to gather signatures on a revised donation agreement.

Staff recommends a modified allowance of donation and enhancements at City parks that align with the Commission’s goals.

Location Total Items/Enhancements
Charmlee Wilderness Park 4*
Las Flores Creek Park 4
Malibu Bluffs Park 20 general items; 12 picnic table plaques* Malibu Skate Park 4*
Trancas Canyon Park 4
Legacy Park 0
*changes from the 2018 Program
The Department receives approximately eight memorial requests each year. An additional ten families are on the waitlist to add memorial items at Malibu Bluffs Park but were not approved because the City has reached the maximum allowable items (20). The Commission recommended adding the 12 picnic table plaques (listed above) to provide options for those on the waitlist.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) 2026 Park Enhancement and Donation Program Guidelines 2) 2018 Redline Park Enhancement and Donation Program Guidelines 2

Page 1 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
City of Malibu
Community Services Department
Park Enhancement and Donation Program
Community organizations and individuals may donate money and needed equipment to the City of Malibu for park enhancements and beautification projects. The City accepts enhancements, such as native plants, trees, or other items, earmarked for a specific project at City parks or facilities.

All donations become the property of the City of Malibu, which will oversee, maintain, and manage them. Over time, a park may be redesigned or renovated, requiring the removal or relocation of a donated item. The City will determine how to manage a donation, with no guarantee of retaining the item for any length of time. The City will make every effort to notify the donor if the item is removed, relocated, replaced, altered, or otherwise changed. It is the donor’s responsibility to notify the City if their contact information has changed.

The following must be approved by the Community Services Director:
• The need for the item or equipment
• The make, model, and type of item or equipment
• The installation location of the item or equipment
• Donor recognition
All park enhancement and donation requests will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission at a Regular meeting. The Commission will make a recommendation to approve or deny applicants, based on the factors outlined in the Program. A limited amount of memorial items and donations are permitted at each park. Once the park reaches the maximum capacity for items, additional items will not be accepted unless it is recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by City Council.

Location Total Items/Enhancements
Charmlee Wilderness Park 4
Las Flores Creek Park 4
Malibu Bluffs Park 20 general items; 12 picnic table plaques Malibu Skate Park 4
Trancas Canyon Park 4
Legacy Park 0
Once a memorial item or donation is approved, costs are determined, payment is received, and the donation agreement is signed, Community Services Department staff will order the item or equipment and install it at the identified facility. Ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the equipment or materials shall become the City’s responsibility. 3

Page 2 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
Modifications to existing facilities that result in a significant visual, functional, or land use change may require special permits and must be approved by the City of Malibu's Community Development Department.

POLICY
A. General Provisions for Donated Items

1. A donation must be consistent with the needs of City parks and facilities.

2. A donation must provide benefit to the City and the community.

3. A cost analysis will be performed prior to the acceptance of the donation to ensure the cost associated with the item does not outweigh the value to the City. The City retains the right to refuse a donation if the cost exceeds the community benefit.

4. Donated items must be in safe, durable, and usable condition.

5. Donated items intended for an exclusive user group or that are associated with a specific group will require approval before a donation can be made.

6. Once a donated item has been accepted, it becomes City property. The City may replace or dispose of the item as it deems appropriate.

7. Facility naming rights must follow City Council Policy #52 and will be approved by City Council.

B. Facility Donation Items

1. The donation must fit the style or current aesthetic plan of the facility.

2. Permanent modifications to facilities will be approved by City Council.

3. The City reserves the right to limit or deny donations based on the need and available space.

C. Acknowledgment of Donor

1. Donor acknowledgment requests that will be permanently displayed with or on the donated item will be considered under the guidelines:
a. The plaque or plate will be placed on the item or near it at the City’s discretion b. The plaque or plate will not be obtrusive or detract from the donated item c. The message on the plaque or plate will be limited to name, date, and a short phrase
4

Page 3 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
d. The City will approve the written message on the plaque or plate. A plaque will be maintained by the City for a total length of 7 years. If the plaque is damaged or missing after 7 years, the City retains the right to remove it without a replacement e. After the initial seven (7) year term, the donor may renew the donation for an additional seven-year period(s) by paying a renewal fee equal to 50% of the original donation amount. If the renewal fee is not paid, the City reserves the right to remove the plaque or donated item
f. In the event a location for a plaque or plate is not feasible, City staff will work with the donor to determine alternative recognition options.

D. Payments and Processing
The City requires full payment for all donations. The minimum cost for a plaque or memorial item is $2,000, with additional charges potentially applied for materials, installation, and maintenance. No items will be ordered until full payment has been received and processed.

The City will issue the donor an invoice along with a Tax Identification number. Installation will be completed within 6 months.

Donation renewals, following the initial seven (7) year period, must be paid within thirty (30) days of City notification (reference C.1.e.).

CITY FACILITIES, PARKS, AND NEEDS
The City will accept donations for the facilities and parks listed below. The items listed for the facility are the highest-priority or most requested donation options. The City restricts the number of memorial donations at each location. Memorial and recognition plaques will be placed on existing benches or picnic tables. The list will be updated on an ongoing basis.

Charmlee Wilderness Park - 2577 Encinal Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Tree donation (no plaque)

2. Native plant donation (no plaque)

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Las Flores Creek Park - 3805 Las Flores Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Malibu Bluffs Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 20
Maximum Picnic Table Plaques: 12

1. Native plant donation

2. Sports field upgrades

3. Equipment for community recreation programs

4. Upgrades to the Michael Landon Center / monetary donations

5. Memorial or recognition plaque
5

Page 4 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 1
Malibu Equestrian Park - 6225 Merritt Drive

1. Picnic tables

2. Arena care and upkeep / monetary donation
Malibu Senior Center - 23825 Stuart Ranch Road (located in Malibu City Hall)

1. Equipment (computers, books, games, printers)

2. Educational materials

3. Kitchen items (serving platters, utensils, etc.)
Malibu Skate Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Memorial or recognition plaque
Trancas Canyon Park - 6050 Trancas Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
6

Page 1 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
City of Malibu
Community Services Department
Park Enhancement and Donation Program
Community organizations and individuals may donate money and needed equipment to the City of Malibu for park enhancements and beautification projects. The City accepts enhancements, such as native plants, trees, or other items, earmarked for a specific project at City parks or facilities.

Page 2 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
Modifications to existing facilities that result in a significant visual, functional, or land use change may require special permits and must be approved by the City of Malibu's Community Development Department.

POLICY
A. General Provisions for Donated Items

1. A donation must be consistent with the needs of City parks and facilities.

2. A donation must provide benefit to the City and the community.

4. Donated items must be in safe, durable, and usable condition.

5. Donated items intended for an exclusive user group or that are associated with a specific group will require approval before a donation can be made.

6. Once a donated item has been accepted, it becomes City property. The City may replace or dispose of the item as it deems appropriate.

7. Facility naming rights must follow City Council Policy #52 and will be approved by City Council.

B. Facility Donation Items

1. The donation must fit the style or current aesthetic plan of the facility.

2. Permanent modifications to facilities will be approved by City Council.

3. The City reserves the right to limit or deny donations based on the need and available space.

C. Acknowledgment of Donor

Page 3 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
A plaque will be maintained by the City for a total length of 7 years. If the plaque is damaged or missing after 7 years, the City retains the right to remove it without a replacement
e. After the initial seven (7) year term, the donor may renew the donation for an e. additional seven-year period(s) by paying a renewal fee equal to 50% of the e. original donation amount. If the renewal fee is not paid, the City reserves the right e. to remove the plaque or donated item
f. In the event a location for a plaque or plate is not feasible, City staff will work with the donor to determine alternative recognition options.

The City will issue the donor an invoice along with a Tax Identification number. Installation will be completed within 6 months.

Donation renewals, following the initial seven (7) year period, must be paid within thirty (30) days of City notification (reference C.1.e.).

Charmlee Wilderness Park - 2577 Encinal Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Tree donation (no plaque)

2. Native plant donation (no plaque)

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Las Flores Creek Park - 3805 Las Flores Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Malibu Bluffs Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 20
Maximum Picnic Table Plaques: 12

1. Native plant donation

2. Sports field upgrades

3. Equipment for community recreation programs

4. Upgrades to the Michael Landon Center / monetary donations

5. Memorial or recognition plaque
Malibu Equestrian Park - 6225 Merritt Drive
9

Page 4 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2

1. Picnic tables

2. Arena care and upkeep / monetary donation
Malibu Senior Center - 23825 Stuart Ranch Road (located in Malibu City Hall)

1. Equipment (computers, books, games, printers)

2. Educational materials

3. Kitchen items (serving platters, utensils, etc.)
Malibu Skate Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Memorial or recognition plaque
Trancas Canyon Park - 6050 Trancas Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition plaque

4. 10

Page 1 of 1 ends

Agenda Item # 1.B.4
Supplemental
Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Kristin Riesgo, Community Services Director Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: February 2, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2026 Subject: Park Enhancement and Donation Program
RECOMMENDED ACTION: At the recommendation of the Parks and Recreation Commission, approve revisions to the Park Enhancement and Donation Program.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: N/A.

DISCUSSION: This supplemental report includes an attachment inadvertently omitted from the original Council Agenda Report which was published on January 30, 2026. The Redline for the Park Enhancement and Donation Program Guidelines is attached.

ATTACHMENTS:
2) 2018 Redline Park Enhancement and Donation Program Guidelines City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

1.B.4

Page 1 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
City of Malibu
Community Services Department
Park Enhancement and Donation Program
Community organizations and individuals may donate money and needed equipment to the City of Malibu for park enhancements and beautification projects. The City accepts enhancements such as benches, native plants, trees or other items which can be earmarked for a specific project taking place , such as native plants, trees, or other items, earmarked for a specific project at City parks or facilities.

All donations become the property of the City of Malibu to oversee, maintain and manage, which will oversee, maintain, and manage them. Over time, a park may be redesigned or renovated, which may requirerequiring the removal or relocation of a donated item. The City will determine how to manage a donation with no guarantee to retain, with no guarantee of retaining the item during for any length of time. The City will make every effort to notify the donor if the item is removed, relocated, replaced, altered, etcor otherwise changed. It is the donor’s responsibility to notify the City if their contact information has changed.

The following must be approved by the Community Services Director:
• The need of for the item or equipment
• The make, model, and type of item or equipment
• The installation location of the item or equipment
• Donor recognition
All park enhancement and donation requests will be reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission at a Regular meeting. The Commission will make a recommendation to approve or deny applicants, based on the factors outlined in the Program. A limited amount of memorial items and donations are permitted at each park. Once the park reaches the maximum capacity onfor items, additional items will not be accepted unless it is recommended by reviewed by the Parks and Recreation Commission and approved by City Council.

Location Total Items/Enhancements
Charmlee Wilderness Park 4
Las Flores Creek Park 4
Malibu Bluffs Park 20 general items; 12 picnic table plaques Malibu Skate Park 4
Trancas Canyon Park 4
Legacy Park 0
Once a memorial item or donation is approved, costs are determined, and payment is received, and the donation agreement is signed, Community Services Department ity staff will order the

Page 2 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
item or equipment and install it at the identified facility. Ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the equipment or materials shall become the City’s responsibility.

Modifications to existing facilities which provide a significant visual, functionalthat result in a significant visual, functional, or land use change may require special permits and must be approved by the City of Malibu's or land use change may require special permits and must be approved by the City of Malibu Planning Community Development Department.

POLICY
A. General Provisions for Donated Items

1. A donation must be consistent with the needs of City parks and facilities.

2. A donation must provide benefit to the City and the community.

3. A cost analysis will be performed prior to the acceptance of the donation to insure ensure the cost associated with the item does not outweigh the value to the City. The City retains the right to refuse a donation if the cost exceeds the community benefit.

4. Donated items must be in safe, durable, and usable condition.

5. Donated items that are intended for an exclusive user group or that are associated with a specific group will require approval before a donation can be made.

6. Once a donated item has been accepted, it becomes City property. The City may replace or dispose of the item as it deems appropriate.

7. Facility naming rights must follow City Council Policy #52 and will only be approved by City Council.

B. Facility Donation Items

1. The donation must fit the style or current aesthetic plan of the facility.

2. Permanent modifications to facilities will only be approved by City Council.

3. The City reserves the right to limit or deny donations based on the need and available space.

C. Acknowledgment of Donor

Page 3 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2
c. The message on the plaque or plate will be limited to name, date, and a short phrase
d. The City will approve the written message on the plaque or plate.

AThe plaque or plate will be maintained by the City for a total length of 7 years. after the donation. If the plaque or plate is damaged or missing after 7 years, the City retains the right to remove it without a replacement
After the initial seven (7) year term, the donor may renew the donation for an additional seven-year period(s) by paying a renewal fee equal to 50% of the original donation amount. If the renewal fee is not paid, the City reserves the right to remove the plaque or donated item
e.
e.f. In the event a location for a plaque or plate is not feasible, City staff will work with the donor to determine alternative recognition options.

D. D. Payments and Processing
The City requires full payment for all donations. The minimum cost for a plaque or memorial item is $2,000, with additional charges potentially applied for materials, installation, and maintenance. No items will be ordered until full payment has been received and processed.

The City will issue the donor an invoice along with a Tax Identification number. The City requests payments for benches, trees, rocks and equipment be made in full. The City will not order any items until the full payment is received and processed. The City will provide the donor with an invoice along with a Tax Identification number.

Installation will be completed in 4 months or lesswithin 6 months.

Donation renewals, following the initial seven (7) year period, must be paid within thirty (30) days of City notification (reference C.1.e.).

CITY FACILITIES, PARKS, AND NEEDS
The City will allow donations to be made accept donations for the facilities and parks listed below.

The items listed with the facility are the highest needs or options for donationsfor the facility are the highest-priority or most requested donation options. The City restricts the number of memorial donations at each location. Memorial and recognition plaques will be placed on existing benches or picnic tables. The list will be updated on an ongoing basis.

Charmlee Wilderness Park - 2577 Encinal Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Tree donation (no plaque)

2. Native plant donation (no plaque)

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Las Flores Creek Park - 3805 Las Flores Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

Page 4 of 4 ends

ATTACHMENT 2

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition plaque
Malibu Bluffs Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 20
Maximum Picnic Table Plaques: 12

1. Native plant donation

2. Sports field upgrades

3. Equipment for community recreation programs

4. Upgrades to the Michael Landon Center / monetary donations

5. Memorial or recognition plaque rock donation

6.5.Bench donation
Malibu Equestrian Park - 6225 Merritt Drive

1. Picnic tables

2. Arena care and upkeep / monetary donation
Malibu Senior Center - 23825 Stuart Ranch Road (located in Malibu City Hall)

1. Equipment (computers, books, games, printers)

2. Educational materials

3. Kitchen items (serving platters, utensils, etc.)

4. Food Cart
Malibu Skate Park - 24250 Pacific Coast Highway
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Memorial or recognition plaque
Trancas Canyon Park - 6050 Trancas Canyon Road
Maximum Memorial Donations: 4

1. Native plant donation

2. Tree donation

3. Memorial or recognition rock/plaque donation

4. Dog Park shelter

5. Bench donation plaque
Malibu Community Pool - 30215 Morning View Drive (located at Malibu High School)

1. Storage Shed

2. Benches

3. Bleachers

4. Equipment for aquatic programs and swim lessons
7 Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Silverstein and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Christopher Smith, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: February 3, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2026 Subject: Retired Annuitant Extra-Help Agreement for Gigi Decavalles-Hughes RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) At the recommendation of the City Manager, approve the appointment of Gigi Decavalles-Hughes pursuant to Government Code Section 21224; and 2) Authorize the City Manager to execute the retired annuitant extra-help agreement with Ms. Decavalles-Hughes.

FISCAL IMPACT: No additional appropriation is required. Funding for the position is included in the Adopted Budget for FY 2025-26 in Account No. 100-7054-4xxx-00 (Salaries and Benefits).

STRATEGIC PRIORITY: This item supports the City’s 2025-2028 Strategic Plan goals.

DISCUSSION: This position will be providing support to the City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Financial Controller with the functions in the Management and Administration Department and Finance Division on a temporary, part-time basis to support the development of the FY 2025-2026 budget, including developing a financial forecast as part of City budgeting, and serving as an advisor on strategies for financing major infrastructure projects such as the sewer project. Ms. Decavalles-Hughes served as the Finance Director for the City of Santa Monica until her retirement, and has served as Interim Finance Director as a retired annuitant in the City of Vernon.

The attached Employment Agreement includes provisions for salary, and other terms and conditions under the extra help retired annuitant rules pursuant to Gov. Code section 21224. The Agreement, if approved, becomes effective February 17, 2026, and would terminate on the earlier of the following to occur:

Page 1 of 2 ends

Agenda Item # 1.B.5.

City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

1.B.5.
(i) Upon the completion of 960 hours worked by Ms. Decavalles-Hughes, or (ii) the date that this appointment is terminated by the City or Ms. Decavalles-Hughes.

Currently, Ms. Decavalles-Hughes will work approximately 20 hours per week between mid-February and the end of June.

Staff recommends the City Council approve the agreement for Retired Annuitant as outlined above and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement on behalf of the City.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Employment Agreement with Gigi Decavalles-Hughes

Page 2 of 2 ends

Agenda Item #

Conditional Limited-Term Appointment Agreement (CalPERS Retiree) Gigi Decavalles-Hughes

Page 2 ends

(5) The compensation received by the retiree is not more than the maximum, nor less than the minimum, monthly base salary paid to other employees performing comparable duties as listed on the City’s publicly available pay schedule, reflected as an hourly rate by dividing the monthly base pay by 173.333.
(6) The compensation paid to the retiree is limited to the hourly rate and no other benefits may be provided.
(7) For any retirees with a retirement effective date on or after January 1, 2013, the appointment must occur at least 180 days following the date of retirement unless the employer certifies that the appointment is necessary to fill a critically needed position before 180 days have expired and the governing body approves the appointment in a public meeting.
(8) The retiree cannot have received unemployment insurance payments in the prior 12- month period arising from work performed as a retiree for any public employer. (9) If the retiree is less than normal retirement age (i.e., the highest age under any retirement formula that the retiree accrued benefits under with any CalPERS employer), at least 60 days must have passed since the retiree’s retirement. This waiting period cannot be waived.

The City, in good faith, has determined that your appointment meets (1) – (6) of the foregoing requirements as follows:
(1) The appointment will be to a temporary position.
(2) The appointment is of limited duration because it is anticipated to last one year. (3) This appointment is made because you possess the specialized skills, as identified in the first paragraph of this appointment offer, necessary for the purpose of the appointment.
(4) The appointment will not exceed 960 hours in a fiscal year (inclusive of all hours worked for any CalPERS employer).
(5) The compensation you will receive is no more nor less than the hourly rate paid to other employees performing comparable duties as listed on the City’s publicly available pay schedule.
(6) Your compensation consists of the hourly rate only; no further benefits will be provided.

By executing this agreement, you are also, in good faith, determining that your appointment meets each of the nine (9) requirements noted above, including the unemployment insurance requirement.

That is, by executing this agreement you are confirming the fact that you have not received unemployment insurance payments within the past 12 months arising from work performed as a retiree for any public employer.

By accepting this appointment, you are also confirming that you are not subject to the 180-day waiting period described in (7) because you retired more than 180 days from the effective date of this Agreement. You are also confirming that the bona fide separation rule described in (9) above does not apply because at least 60 days have passed since your retirement.

Notwithstanding (4) above, the City has no way of monitoring the hours that you work for another CalPERS employer. As such, it is your responsibility to ensure that the total hours worked in a fiscal year (July 1 – June 30) for the City and any other CalPERS employer do not exceed 960 hours in the Conditional Limited-Term Appointment Agreement (CalPERS Retiree) Gigi Decavalles-Hughes

Page 3 ends

aggregate. However, please note that consistent with the requirements of Section 21220(d) and (e), the City will enroll you in CalPERS solely for administrative recordkeeping purposes (you will remain in retired status) and will report both your hours and pay pursuant to this agreement.

By executing this agreement, you waive any claims against the City arising from an adverse determination by CalPERS associated with this appointment that is attributed to any misrepresentation made by you in this agreement or any violation of these rules caused by employment with any other CalPERS employer. Please contact CalPERS if you have any questions regarding the requirements of Sections 21224 or this appointment.

There is no right to public employment expressed by this agreement. All limited-term appointments are subject to the business necessity of the City and are at-will; therefore, the appointment may end with or without cause or advance notice.

We welcome you to your limited-term appointment with the City and extend our best wishes for your success in the temporary position.

If you agree with the terms of this agreement, please review and sign the acknowledgment below.

If you have additional questions or comments, feel free to contact me directly.

Sincerely,
______________________________
Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Acknowledgment:

I, Gigi Decavalles-Hughes, agree to this Conditional Limited Term Appointment Agreement (CalPERS Retiree), and hereby warrant that I understand and agree with all the terms and conditions of employment as set forth in this letter.
___________________________________________ __________________ Signature Date

Page 1 of 1 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
-
Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Frances Arricale, Deputy City Manager
Monica Castillo, Deputy City Attorney
Reviewed by: Trevor Rusin, Interim City Attorney
Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: January 30, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2025 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) After the City Attorney reads the title of the ordinance, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 532 , an ordinance of the City of Malibu amending Chapter 5.16 (Mobilehome Park Rent Control Regulations) of Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations) and repealing Chapter 2.28 (Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission) of Title 2 (Administration and Personnel) of the Malibu Municipal Code, and finding the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and 2) Direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 532 for the February 23, 2026 City Council Regular Meeting.

DISCUSSION: This report will be distributed under separate cover.

City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

5.A.

Page 1 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Supplemental
Council Agenda Report
To: Mayor Riggins and the Honorable Members of the City Council Prepared by: Frances Arricale, Deputy City Manager
Monica Castillo, Deputy City Attorney
Reviewed by: Trevor Rusin, Interim City Attorney
Approved by: Rob DuBoux, Interim City Manager
Date prepared: January 30, 2026 Meeting date: February 9, 2025 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Ordinance
RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) After the City Attorney reads the title of the ordinance, introduce on first reading Ordinance No. 532 , an ordinance of the City of Malibu amending Chapter 5.16 (Mobilehome Park Rent Control Regulations) of Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations) and repealing Chapter 2.28 (Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission) of Title 2 (Administration and Personnel) of the Malibu Municipal Code, and finding the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; and 2) Direct staff to schedule second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 532 for the February 23, 2026 City Council Regular Meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommended action.

STRATEGIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION: N/A.

DISCUSSION:

Background
In 1976, California enacted the California Mobile Home Residency Law to protect the rights of mobilehome park residents and establish basic legal protections. Ever since, numerous cities across California, including Malibu, have adopted different variations of mobilehome rent control ordinances “to address the unique attributes of mobilehome ownership and mobilehome park management.”1
1 Stardust Mobile Ests., LLC v. City of San Buenaventura (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 1170, 1180.

City Council Meeting
02-09-26
Item

5.A.
1

Page 2 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Mobilehome parks offer a hybrid of home ownership and home rental. A tenant in a mobilehome park owns the trailer or mobilehome itself and often rents the space on which it sits. The park provides access and sometimes other amenities such as a recreation room, a swimming pool, landscaping and security.
“Mobilehome” is really a misnomer because the structures, as a practical matter, are not really mobile. They are manufactured homes which do not have traditional foundations.

Most mobilehomes lose value with age (like a car would) and few older mobilehomes could withstand relocation. As such, a mobilehome is sold in place, and the new owner assumes the lease or acquires a right to rent the space in the park where the mobilehome sits.

California State Law
State law regulates mobilehome occupancy and mobilehome parks. There are five statutory schemes that are presently in effect: (1) Mobilehome Residency Law (Civil Code §§ 798 et seq.); (2) Mobilehome Residency Law Protection Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 18800 et seq.); (3) Manufactured Housing Act of 1980 (Health and Safety Code §§ 18000 et seq.); (4) Mobilehome Parks Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 18200 et seq.); and (5) Special Occupancy Parks Act (Health and Safety Code §§ 18860 et seq.).

In addition, the California Department of Housing and Community Development enacts regulations for mobilehomes and is the enforcement agency for health and safety violations where local government has not assumed enforcement.2 The Mobilehome Residency Law (“MRL”) regulates the landlord-tenant relationship between mobilehome park owners and park residents, and does not expressly provide for statewide rent control for mobilehome parks. The California Supreme Court has held that the MRL is not a rent control law that restricts how much rent a mobilehome park owner may charge its residents.3 The MRL exempts certain mobile home spaces and leases from local rent control measures, such as new construction initially held out for rent after January 1, 19904, or if the mobile home is not the principal residence of the homeowner and the homeowner has not rented the mobile home to another party.5 Even where a mobile home space lease is not exempt from a local rent control measure, the relevant local jurisdiction must allow the landlord to charge the tenant certain mandatory fees, 2 California Department of Housing and Community Development, https://www.hcd.ca.gov/manufactured-and-mobilehomes (last accessed Jan. 22, 2026); see also Title 25, Division 1 of the California Code of Regulations. 3 Cacho v. Boudreau, 40 Cal. 4th 341, 350-51 (2007) (holding that the MRL does not prohibit local governments from imposing rent control in mobilehome parks); Palo Verdes Shores Mobile Estates, Ltd. v. City of L.A., 142 Cal. App. 3d 362, 374 (1983) (holding that the MRL is not a general and pervasive legislative scheme for the regulation of all aspects of mobilehome parks and residents); Griffith v. Cnty. of Santa Cruz, 79 Cal. App. 4th 1318, 1323 (2000) (stating that “it is settled . . . that mobilehome park rent controls are not preempted by the MRL [and] . . . the MRL . . . is not, nor was intended, to be a rent control measure.”). 4 Civ. Code, §§ 798.7, 798.45. 5 Civ. Code § 798.21(a). 2

Page 3 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
including: fees imposed by a city, a county, a city and county, the state, or the federal government on or after January 1, 1995, on the space rented by the homeowner.

State law previously included another exemption from local rent control, which applied to any mobile home space lease that (1) was for a term greater than 12 months, (2) was between management and a homeowner for residence of the homeowner, and (3) afforded the homeowner at least 30 days from the offer of the lease to accept or reject the lease. This exemption from local rent control was removed as of January 1, 2025 by the operative provisions of AB 2782.

Currently, there is pending legislation in the California State Legislature (2025-2026 biennium) proposing to amend rent control in mobilehome parks:
o Assembly Bill 768 was introduced in 2025 and is a carryover bill to the 2026 session of the biennium. The bill originally proposed to exempt from rent stabilization any mobilehome that is not the actual residence of the homeowner for at least 30 consecutive days, which would have then by application removed rent stabilization if a homeowner rented/leased the trailer to a tenant.
 In January 2026, the bill was amended to now cover “permanent housing” that includes the homeowner and an approved tenant under rent stabilization, and proposes that only seasonal vacation homes and short-term rentals would then be exempt from rent stabilization.  As of January 20, 2026, this bill passed the Assembly and is ordered to the Senate. If passed, the likely effective date would be January 1, 2027.
o Assembly Bill 1543 was just introduced in 2026, and proposes to amend the MRL by applying the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rent stabilization cap to all mobilehome parks in the state. Presently, the CPI aspect of the MRL only applies to “qualified mobilehome parks” – defined as located within and governed by the jurisdiction of two incorporated cities.  The two mobilehome parks located in Malibu do not meet the “qualified” definition under the current law; however, the MRL also permits local governments to apply maximum rent caps. Malibu by its local ordinance has applied a CPI cap for more than three decades.
 This bill has yet to be heard in committee (tentatively set for February 5, 2026). If this bill passes this session, it would be effective January 1, 2027. The State law CPI space rent caps would then supersede 3

Page 4 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
the City’s CPI increase provisions provided they are fully preempted, and cover the two mobilehome parks located in Malibu.

Fair Rate of Return
To meet constitutional requirements, all ordinances must allow the property owner to obtain a fair rate of return. The California Supreme Court has stated that an ordinance need not contain a specific formula as long as it provides a method of regulating rents that avoids confiscatory results.6 An ordinance should provide the landlord with adequate procedures for obtaining a timely rent adjustment, and an adjustment mechanism that is flexible enough to authorize a sufficient increase to provide a fair return.

Vacancy Control
State law governing mobilehome parks provides no restriction on a property owner’s right to rent a vacant space at any price. Because spaces are very rarely actually vacant, vacancy almost always means the in-place sale of the mobilehome. Many jurisdictions regulate increases in such situations through different forms of “vacancy control” in their local ordinances.

The inclusion of vacancy control helps minimize the risk of legal challenge regarding the fair rate of return by allowing larger increases when there is a vacancy. Some rent stabilization ordinances provide that rent may be raised to “market rates” whenever a mobilehome is sold; other ordinances, including Malibu’s current Ordinance, provide that the rent may be raised by a fixed percentage of the rent-controlled rate. The City limits the vacancy increase to keep rents affordable and limit increases to keep generally with inflation.

However, there is an unintended effect of vacancy control that has been the source of considerable litigation and controversy in this area of law. Park residents/homeowners benefit when the controlled rents carry over to the subsequent tenant. Although a mobilehome itself may have depreciated as a physical asset, the right to occupy a rentcontrolled space positively influences the value of the sale. Thus, the homeowner is able to sell both the mobilehome and its right to be on the rent-controlled space for considerably more than the mobilehome alone might fetch on the open market. Park owners have complained that this unfairly transfers the value of their land to the tenant. Park owners assert that in the purchase price the tenant is in essence receiving value for the land which the homeowner does not own. Park owners also argue that this phenomenon (tenants being able to sell their mobilehomes for enhanced prices due to rent control) undermines a city’s objective of maintaining affordable housing because rent control increases the price of the mobilehome and makes the park less affordable to low-income families to buy a home there.
6 Fisher v City of Berkeley (1984) 37 Cal.3d 644, 680, aff’d (1986) 475 U.S. 260. 4

Page 5 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

To balance the City’s interest in maintaining affordable housing with the requirement to provide a fair rate of return, the City allows for an increase in rent of 15% upon vacancy.

History: Malibu Rent Stabilization Commission and Ordinance Soon after the City of Malibu was incorporated in 1991, the City Council established the Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission and enacted Malibu’s Mobilehome Rent Stabilization Ordinance to protect residents from excessive space rent increases through balancing tenant needs with a fair return for park owners for the two parks located in Malibu – Point Dume Club Mobilehome Park (“Point Dume”) and Paradise Cove Mobilehome Park (“Paradise Cove”).

The original Ordinance in 1991 (“Ordinance”) set up strict rent control requirements that prompted litigation from the two mobilehome parks. A federal court ruling in 1994 held that aspects of Malibu’s Ordinance, including an eight-year rent rollback, a moratorium on new parks, and its fair return provisions were invalid on their face and denied due process to park owners. With respect to the fair return provisions, the court held they failed to allow owners to adjust base rent to a level that provides a reasonable return in all circumstances.

Upheld were the Ordinance’s rent increase limits, vacancy control provisions, park closure restrictions, and pass-through provisions. (See Attachment 4, Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu.)
Following the federal ruling and appeals therefrom, the City entered into a settlement agreement to pay damages. (See Attachment 5, Settlement Agreement.) In compliance with the agreement, the City revised its ordinance to establish base rents for Point Dume and to adopt several provisions in the existing Ordinance, including the CPI cap structure, the vacancy increase cap of 15%, the sublease surcharge, the absentee owner surcharge, the sublease hardship exemption, infrastructure pass-through provisions, and the fair return provisions. The agreement terminated in 2009.

From 1991 to 2008, the Commission operated on an as-needed basis for hearings and other matters brought to its attention. In 2008, the Commission went dormant as there were no longer the requisite number of commissioners serving to constitute a quorum.

During the time from 2008 to 2025 while the Commission was dormant, it appears that few matters relating to mobilehome rent stabilization were brought to the attention of the City, and the City Manager’s Office continued to administer annual registrations and required CPI notices as specified in the ordinance and adopted regulations.

In 2025, new commissioners were appointed to the Commission to meet monthly going forward. An Ad Hoc Committee was formed by the Commission to work with the City Attorney’s Office to examine and update the ordinance and also propose other changes.

The draft updated the Ordinance to comply with current law, and also proposed significant 5

Page 6 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
changes to the Ordinance. The draft was reviewed by the full Commission at two meetings.

On November 20, 2025, the Commission voted to recommend Ordinance amendments to the City Council, with some sections deferred for a subsequent meeting. Chair Kevin Shenkman, Vice Chair Bill Sampson, and Commissioner Sam Shenkman voted yes; Commissioner Grisanti voted no; and Commissioner Scott Blum was absent.

On December 18, 2025, the Commission voted to amend its recommendation to adjust for language related to the park closure process and to add a prohibition against parks banning subleases. Chair Kevin Shenkman, Vice Chair Bill Sampson, and Commissioner Sam Shenkman voted yes; Commissioner Grisanti voted no; and Commissioner Scott Blum was absent. The Commission’s recommended amended ordinance based on this meeting and the November meeting is attached to this report as Attachment 3.

Public comment on the proposed changes to the Ordinance included support by some park residents, as well as concerns raised by other residents. Park ownership did not speak or provide comments at the November or December meetings of the Commission.

At the January 2026 Commission Meeting, a representative for Paradise Cove formally objected to any changes to the Ordinance and stated that the parks were not informed of the Commission Ad Hoc proposal, and no discussions with the parks were initiated prior to the Commission approving its recommended changes to the Ordinance. To date, there has not been formal comment made by a Point Dume park ownership representative.

Ordinance
The City’s Ordinance is set forth in Chapter 5.16 of the Municipal Code. Under the Ordinance, a space rent for those spaces governed by the Ordinance7 may be automatically adjusted annually by CPI8 up to 5% (ceiling) and at least by 2% (floor). This is called a “formula Increase” in the Ordinance.

In addition to the annual CPI, the Ordinance provides that space rent may be increased up to an additional 15% upon the sale of a mobilehome. This is referred to as a “vacancy 7 The current Ordinance does not apply to spaces rented for nonresidential uses; parks managed or operated by the U.S. government, Los Angeles County, or the City; tenancies of 20 days or less; and tenancies subject to regulations that prohibit rent control. (MMC §5.16.030(A)-(D).) Also exempted until January 1, 2025 was any space that was under a lease exceeding 12 months (i.e. a long-term lease) that complied with requirements set forth in now repealed Civil Code Section 798.17. (Id. §

5.16.030(E) & (F).)
8 "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index (All Items) prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles-AnaheimRiverside area relating to all urban consumers. If the method of calculating the CPI is substantially revised after the adoption of the ordinance codified in this chapter, the method in effect upon adoption of such ordinance shall continue to be used, or the revised CPI shall be adjusted by the city to correspond to that method. (MMC §5.16.020) 6

Page 7 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
increase.” There are a few other situations in which a space rent may be increased if the park owner is required by the government to provide services beyond those provided at the time the ordinance was enacted, and where the space is being subleased. The ordinance also includes a hardship exemption that could impact such increases.

After an application is received (other than for the automatic CPI adjustments), the Commission conducts a hearing and issues a decision. Applications can come from a park owner seeking a rent increase to achieve a fair return or from a mobilehome owner for a decrease when housing services have been eliminated.

Consistent with its function, the Commission has historically met only when an application is filed with the City under the Ordinance. The Ordinance establishes specific time periods in which the City must act on a rent adjustment application.

In addition to processing rent adjustment applications, should a park seek to close or convert its use, the Ordinance implements the provisions of state law that govern such situations. Under these circumstances, park owners are required to prepare a conversion impact report and a relocation plan, which the Commission will review for compliance.

Proposed Amended Ordinance
Staff worked closely with the Ad Hoc Committee and Commission in developing the amendments to the Ordinance (Attachment 3, Commission Amendments). While Staff and the Commission agreed on most amendments, other recommendations are included in Attachment 2. The suggested modifications fall generally into four categories: (1) policyrelated provisions, (2) amendments to remove ambiguity and add clarity (3) administration and procedures, and (4) amendments to align with state law.

1. Policy-Related Provisions
 Consumer Price Index
As discussed above, the existing Ordinance permits park owners to automatically adjust space rent annually by CPI up to 5% (ceiling) and at least by 2% (floor), referred to as a “formula increase”. The Ordinance defines “CPI” to mean the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside area relating to all urban consumers. This index, however, was discontinued in 2018, as detailed below.

CPIs are issued by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (USBLS) on a geographic basis.

Originally, the USBLS issued a Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside CPI that included Malibu given its location in the Los Angeles county region, and this index was specified in Malibu’s Ordinance. In 2018, the USBLS undertook a major redesign of the CPI geographic sample, and retired the aforementioned CPI, replacing it with an updated Los Angeles7

Page 8 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Long Beach-Anaheim CPI. The USBLS provided direction to the City of Malibu that the new index should be used and is “continuous” to the retired index for CPI application by Malibu. (See Attachment 6, USBLS Email).

Instead of using this index, the Commission’s proposed language would use the average of the current index (the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim index) and the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area index. Staff has provided alternative language that would keep the current CPI index should the Council choose to keep the index used the same instead of making this change.9
Averaging the CPIs would result in a lower CPI increase this year but could result in a higher increase in other years. Should the Council choose to use the average of these regional CPIs rather than the rate for the Los Angeles region, it should provide a justification for why the average should be used and how it would provide a fair rate of return with future annual adjustments. One possibility proposed at a commission meeting is that the CPI average from of the two geographic locations would define the housing market of all of Southern California. This could result in higher or lower increases each year but could overall level out to be reflective of the whole Southern California housing market.

Providing an accurate CPI that tracks inflation is important as it ensures that the park owners are not denied a fair rate of return over time. Continuation of the current CPI builds upon prior year increases starting from base year rates when rent was at a presumptive fair return rate, thus preserving those fair return levels. This CPI has been long established in the City, and has not been challenged. A change could have unpredictable effects— and if it is too low it could draw a legal challenge, while if it is too high it could affect affordability for residents.

Additionally, as discussed above, this decision could be taken away from the City. The new statewide mobilehome park rent control law, Assembly Bill 1543 (AB 1543), was introduced this January which would require Malibu parks to use the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim CPI when calculating maximum rent.
 Subleases
The Commission has proposed significant changes to how subleases are treated under the Ordinance. Whether, and how, to make changes is a policy decision for the Council.

Staff’s alternative in Attachment 2 leaves sublease-related provisions in the existing Ordinance untouched to give the Council an option if it does not want to make the proposed changes. A discussion of the proposed changes and related issues follows. 9 The language would define “CPI” to mean the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim CPI and any successor CPI.” 8

Page 9 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

Existing Ordinance
The existing Ordinance does not prohibit a homeowner from subleasing his or her mobilehome. If a homeowner does so, the park owner may increase the homeowner’s space rent up to 15% of the rent otherwise permitted. This surcharge applies only for the duration of the sublease and cannot go into effect for the first 12 months after the last vacancy increase. A homeowner may apply for a hardship exemption with the city manager that would be valid for one year (and renewable for additional one-year terms) if the applicant meets specified criteria related to demonstrating the hardship the increase would cause.

The Commission removed the 15% sublease surcharge and introduced a sublease rent cap scheme described further below. Ordinance No. 532 retains the surcharge and does not contain a sublease rent control scheme.

No contractual prohibition on subleasing
The Commission’s amendments would bar park owners from prohibiting subleases or otherwise unreasonably refusing to allow them, and prohibits retaliation against a homeowner who subleases a mobilehome. Any contractual provision that prohibits leases would be voided.

Staff recommends allowing park owners to prohibit subleasing unless contrary to law. This is consistent with the MRL which requires park owners to permit subleasing for at least 12 months if a “medical emergency or medical treatment requires the homeowner to be absent from his or her home and this is confirmed in writing by an attending physician.”10 The MRL also permits owners to require a homeowner to reside in the park for one year before subleasing, and to require the owner’s approval of the subtenant subject to the process and restrictions specified in the MRL, among other park owner rights. 11 Sublease rent limits
The Commission’s amendments would impose rent limits on subleases. They propose to limit subtenant rent to the aggregate of (1) the space rent, (2) the actual cost of utilities the sublessor pays, and (3) one of two amounts depending on whether subtenants are in the same family:
• If all are in the same family (including parents/children, grandparents/grandchildren, siblings, aunts/uncles, great aunts / great uncles, and first and/or second cousins), 10 Civ. Code. § 798.23.5(a)-(b)(1). 11 Id. § 798.23.5(b)(2) & (5). 9

Page 10 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
the sublessor may charge $1,250, adjusted annually, starting March 2027, based on the CPI
• If all are not in the same family, the sublessor may charge more at $1,650, adjusted annually, starting March 2027, based on the CPI
If the rent limits would prevent the homeowner/sublessor from receiving a reasonable return on the purchase of a mobilehome, the homeowner may apply to the Commission to charge up to an additional 50% of the above amounts.

Subleased Mobilehome Registration
The Commission’s amendments would additionally require a homeowner/sublessor to register any subleased mobilehome with the City Manager within specified time periods, and submit a schedule of rent and other charges. The homeowner/sublessor would be prohibited from accepting rent without first registering, and may be ordered to refund rent received for an unregistered sublease.

Policy Considerations
The Commission’s recommended changes introduce a new rent control framework regulating the subleasing of homeowners’ trailers, including a cap that limits such sublease amounts to a fixed dollar figure based on the space rent. This departs from the existing Ordinance and state law, which focus on rent control provisions applicable to mobilehome space rents, which are regulated and managed at the park level.

Making these changes will likely have a dramatic impact on residents and the parks.

Importantly, this will cap the rent that can be charged based on the space rent. This means that someone who invests a significant amount of money in the construction or improvement of their mobilehome will be capped at the same rent as someone who owns a unit that is much less expensive and has not been renovated or improved--unless they petition the Commission, and then may be able to increase the rent up to a maximum of $1875 a month (for those who meet the family criteria) or $2475 (for those who don’t meet that criteria). It will also introduce potentially significant administrative work and code enforcement challenges.

Also, as described above, AB 768 is being actively considered during this 2025-2026 legislative session. If AB 768 as amended in January passes, spaces with subleased mobilehomes will continue to be locally rent-controlled, but short-term rentals would be prohibited. If it takes another form it could significantly impact the City’s ordinance. 10

Page 11 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
 New Commission Powers: Rent Increase Approval and Retrospective Rent Review
The Commission’s amendments in Attachment 3 would increase its powers and eliminate staff’s administration of CPI notices for annual rent increase cap processes. Sections

5.16.080, 5.16.080.1, and 5.16.090 of the Commission’s recommendations provide that the Commission must approve increases for any space rent or sublease rent—including CPI. Of note, Section 5.16.080, could provide for Commission re-approval of prior space rent increases since March 28, 1991.

Another amendment, Section 5.16.050, would empower the Commission to adjust space rents and sublease rents retrospectively, including an award or return of any collected rent or space rent, for a period going back indefinitely.

Staff recommends that the Ordinance not include these amendments, except for Commission authority to order refunds of rent improperly collected over the last three years. This three-year lookback period is based on the statute of limitations for liabilities created by statute. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 338(a).
 Civil Actions and Civil Penalties
Council may choose to add civil penalties and other enforcement measures. For instance, all versions of the ordinance recommend establishing a civil penalty for violating the ordinance. Under this penalty scheme, a person who violates the ordinance would be subject to a $100 penalty per violation, or $200 penalty per willful violation.

In addition, all versions of the ordinance allow an aggrieved person to file a civil action on behalf of the City and other aggrieved persons to recover civil penalties. Any recovered penalties would be distributed as follows: 10% to the aggrieved persons who filed the action; 25% to the other aggrieved persons; and 65% to the City of Malibu for the purpose of enforcing the ordinance and educating the public about the ordinance.

Also, all versions of the ordinance would entitle a prevailing homeowner in court to recover costs and reasonable attorney’s fees. In contrast, a prevailing park owner could not recover costs unless the court finds the homeowner’s action or defense was frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation.

Finally, all versions of the ordinance would allow the Commission to order a park owner who willfully charged a homeowner rent amounts greater than permitted by the ordinance to pay treble the amount or $5,000, whichever is greater. Such orders would be limited to the rent improperly collected during the immediate three years preceding the filing of an application.
11

Page 12 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

2. Amendments to Remove Ambiguity and Add Clarity to Staff’s Function To align with long-established practice, ensure efficiency and objectivity, avoid problems related to historical difficulties in recruiting a quorum of commissioners, and consolidate administrative functions in City Staff, Staff proposes that the Ordinance be revised with the following changes as shown in Attachment 2:

1. Section 5.16.020 – Definition of “CPI Adjustment Period” – revised to specify the “city manager” will calculate the annual CPI change for rent increases.

This matches historical practice.

2. Section 5.16.100 – Rent increases – Commission approval – revised to clarify that annual CPI increases and vacancy increases are implemented by the city manager to match historical practice.

3. Section 5.16.110 – Rent adjustments – Administration - adds a new section that directs the city manager to process applications submitted under this chapter and develop any materials necessary for its administration. Section

5.16.120(A) – Formula Increases – revised to specify that the city manager may adopt regulations to implement annual CPI increases. This matches historical practice.

4. Section 5.16.120(B) – Vacancy Increases – revised to specify that the city manager administers vacancy increases and may adopt regulations to implement such increases. This matches historical practice.

5. Section 5.16.140(A)(1) – Rent adjustments – Commission review - revised to clarify that annual CPI increases, vacancy increases, and limited infrastructure improvement increases are implemented by the city manager.

This matches historical practice.

3. Administration and Procedures
Staff recommends deleting Chapter 2.28 (Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission) and moving its provisions to Chapter 5.16 (Mobilehome Park Rent Control Regulations), and also limited changes for efficiency, to eliminate conflicts, refine existing procedures for rent adjustments and park closures/conversions, and to separate administrative functions to be handled under the purview of the city manager for more efficient implementation, among other changes to process. These changes are shown in Attachment 2 and are summarized as follows:

1. Section 5.16.040 – Mobilehome park rent stabilization commission – transfers the more recently adopted Section 2.28.010 describing the establishment and organization of the commission to Chapter 5.16 and adds a new subsection (C) which provides that the city manager will determine when the commission 12

Page 13 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
meets and will set the agenda. The proposed ordinance would repeal Section

2.28.010 so that mobilehome park regulations are found in one chapter.

2. Section 5.16.050 – Term – transfers the more recently adopted Section

2.28.020 establishing commissioners’ terms of four years as well as commissioners’ powers and duties to Chapter 5.16. The proposed ordinance would repeal Section 2.28.030 so that mobilehome park regulations are found in one chapter.

3. Section 5.16.060 – Mobilehome park rent stabilization commission – Powers and duties – transfers the more recently adopted Section 2.28.030 to Chapter

5.16 and clarifies that the commission’s authority to issue regulations is limited to regulations for the conduct of hearings. The proposed ordinance would repeal Section 2.28.030 so that mobilehome park regulation provisions are found in one chapter.

4. Section 5.16.070 – Registration – revised so that the city manager instead of the city clerk will administer parks’ registrations with the city. The amendment also clarifies that annual registrations would be required every December 31 and allows the Commission or any homeowner to inspect registrations upon request. The right to inspect registrations is recommended in all versions and aids in the preparation of rent adjustment applications.

5. Section 5.16.140(A)(2) - Rent adjustments – Commission review – adds that when the park owner is an applicant, service must be made by certified mail if mailed and that all applicants must file a proof of service concurrently with their application. Also added is a requirement that the owner make copies of the rent schedule and supporting documentation available to homeowners at the park’s office upon request.

6. Section 5.16.140(B) - Rent adjustments – Commission review – allows an applicant to appeal the city manager’s determination that an application is incomplete to the commission within 10 days, and to appeal the commission’s decision to the City Council within 10 days. A commissioner may not assist an applicant with completing the application form—but staff may. This section is recommended in all versions except staff recommends adding the right to appeal to the City Council to provide another layer of review ensuring a fair hearing and is consistent with how planning commission decisions are treated.

7. Section 5.16.140(C) - Rent adjustments – Commission review – specifies the city manager must set a hearing on a fair return application no later than 90 days after it is complete, and reduces the time to set a hearing on all other applications from 50 to 30 days after the application is complete. The city manager must within 10 days of a completed application send notice of the hearing date to the applicant.

8. Section 5.16.140(D) - Rent adjustments – Commission review – revised so that a petition to the commission for review of a proposed rent increase is filed with the city manager instead of the city clerk. The amendment also requires 13

Page 14 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
the petition to be in a form and contain such information as may be required by the city manager instead of the commission.

9. Section 5.16.150(D) – Review hearings – specifies hearing recordings must be preserved for the duration of pending litigation or claims.

10. Section 5.16.160(B) - Rent adjustments – Commission decision authority – revised to remove vague and unclear grounds requiring a park owner to reimburse a successful homeowner applicant all or a part of their application fee. A homeowner remains entitled to reimbursement if a rent reduction application is successful.

11. Section 5.16.160(C) - Rent adjustments – Commission decision authority – revised to limit refunds to any rent improperly collected during the immediate three years preceding the filing of an application. This subsection also now authorizes rent credit to compensate a homeowner for such improper charges.

12. Section 5.16.160(D) - Rent adjustments – Commission decision authority – adds the right to appeal a commission rent adjustment decision to the City Council and requires the commission decision to be in writing and to include the commission’s conclusions and findings.

13. Section 5.16.160(F) - Rent adjustments – Commission decision authority – declares that a homeowner that withholds rent from a park owner who has not yet complied with a commission order to return rent may use this section as an affirmative defense in an eviction proceeding.

14. Section 5.16.190(C) – New and prospective homeowners - adds a requirement for park owners to maintain a copy of a homeowner’s signed acknowledgment of the City’s mobilehome park rent stabilization ordinance for the term of the tenancy.

15. Section 5.16.240 – Just and reasonable return – adds a requirement that the City Council adopt regulations that establish a formula to calculate the rent increase necessary to achieve a fair return.12

16. Section 5.16.250 – Mobilehome park conversion impact reports - revisions were made to clarify park cessation of use/conversion requirements and procedure, including the following:
a. The advisory agency that approves conversion impact reports is now broadened to include any authority designated by City Council. b. Words were deleted or added for clarity.
c. The option for a displaced homeowner to waive rights to benefits under statute was revised to be more protective of homeowners. The waiver is only valid if the owner provides benefits comparable to those required by 12 A common formula is the maintenance of net operating income (MNOI) method. This formula determines a rent increase that restores the park owner to the same net operating income earned in a base year, adjusted for inflation. The base year is a year when the park was presumed to be earning a fair return and is typically the year before rent control. The MNOI method is one of the methods used by the Santa Monica Rent Control Review Board. See Santa Monica Rent Control Regulations 4100 - 4106.
14

Page 15 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.
statute, the waiver is in writing and contains the text of Section 5.16.250, and includes a signed acknowledgment that the homeowner read and understands their rights and knowingly agreed to waive them. d. A requirement was added that the advisory agency give notice to the park owner of their duties to notify homeowners and subtenants of the proposed change in use or conversion and the manner of such notification in accordance with state law.
e. Revisions distinguish between the application for land use permits required to change permitted uses on the park and the conversion impact report which describes adverse impacts to displaced homeowners and mitigation benefits, both of which require advisory agency approval. f. Park owners must now provide at least 12 months’ notice of termination of tenancy instead of the state law minimum of six months’ notice. g. Revisions allow interested parties to appeal advisory agency decisions to the city council.

17. Uncodified Section 4 of the Amended Ordinance requires new regulations to be implemented as the previous regulations were tied to the old ordinance.

4. State Law Alignment
All versions of the ordinance delete sections based on MRL provisions no longer in effect and update sections to comport with current state law. These changes are shown in Attachment 2 and are listed below.

1. Section 5.16.030 – Exemptions – deleted subsections which exempted longterm lease agreements under now repealed Civil Code section 798.17 from local rent control.

2. Section 5.16.040(D) – Rent adjustments – Commission review – deleted because no longer applicable due to repeal of Civil Code Civil Code section 798.17.

3. Section 5.16.160(A) - Rent adjustments – Commission decision authority – adds factors that state law requires the commission to consider when deciding upon a rent adjustment application.

4. Section 5.16.250(D)(1)(a) – Mobilehome park relocation impact reports – adds state law requirements, including for the appraisal that must be prepared at the park owner’s cost for the mobilehomes of displaced homeowners when a mobilehome park is closing.

5. Section 5.16.250(E)(1) – Mobilehome park relocation impact reports – adds a finding state law requires the advisory agency to make before approving a park’s change of use.
15

Page 16 of 16 ends

Agenda Item # 5.A.

ATTACHMENTS:
1) Ordinance No. 532
2) Redlined Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 532
3) Redlined Commission-Recommended Amendments
4) Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu
5) Adamson Companies Settlement Agreement
6) USBLS Email
16 ORDINANCE NO. 532
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF MALIBU AMENDING CHAPTER 5.16 (MOBILEHOME PARK RENT CONTROL REGULATIONS) OF TITLE 5
(BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS) AND REPEALING CHAPTER

2.28 (MOBILEHOME PARK RENT STABILIZATION COMMISSION)
OF TITLE 2 (ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL) OF THE MALIBU

MUNICIPAL CODE, AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE IS EXEMPT FROM

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
The City Council of the City of Malibu does ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

A. By virtue of the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, the City of Malibu (“City”) has the authority to enact regulations which promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens, including the regulation of mobilehome space rents.

B. The high cost of moving mobilehomes; the potential for damage resulting therefrom; the requirements relating to the installation of mobilehomes, including permits, landscaping and site preparation; the lack of alternative sites for mobilehome residents; and the substantial investment of homeowners in such homes severely restrict homeowners’ ability to avoid excessive rent increases by relocating to another site.

C. The City Council has previously determined, and still finds, that these conditions create an imbalance in bargaining power between mobilehome park owners and mobilehome homeowners that warrants reasonable regulation of space rents to prevent excessive increases while recognizing park owners’ right to a fair return.

D. Mobilehome parks in Malibu are an important source of long-term housing stability and affordable homeownership opportunities, particularly for seniors and residents on fixed or moderate incomes, and displacement from such housing can impose significant social and economic costs on affected residents and the Malibu community at large.

E. On December 3, 1991, the City adopted a Mobile Home Rent Control Ordinance, now codified in Chapter 5.16 of the Malibu Municipal Code, to address these conditions and protect the owners and occupiers of mobilehomes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same time recognizing the need of park owners to receive a fair return on their property.

F. The City Council has reviewed the administration and practical operation of the existing ordinance and has received evidence and public input indicating that certain provisions may benefit from clarification or refinement to improve predictability and administrative efficiency, and to better align the ordinance with its purposes.

G. The City Council also desires to mitigate the social and fiscal impact of mobilehome park closures in a way that sufficiently compensates residents of mobilehomes who are forced to relocate or abandon their homes as a result of park closure.

Attachment 1
17 Ordinance No. 532

Page 2 of 26 ends

____________________

H. The State Mobilehome Residency Law (California Civil Code Sections 798, et seq.) and California Government Code Sections 65863.7 and 66427.4 regulate the grounds on which mobilehome residents may be evicted from a mobilehome park; and authorize local jurisdictions to impose reasonable measures to mitigate the adverse impacts on displaced mobilehome residents when a mobilehome park closes or converts to another use.

I. Pursuant to the California Government Code Section 65863.7 and the City's police power, the City Council desires to refine its existing procedure and standards for assessing the impacts of a mobilehome park closure or conversion on the displaced mobilehome residents residing in the park being closed and to determine appropriate relocation assistance for those residents.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review.

The City Council has analyzed the amendments to the City’s mobilehome rent control ordinance described herein. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. The City Council has determined that there is no possibility the amendments will have a significant effect on the environment, as they impose financial regulations for the rental of mobilehome park spaces and homes, and accordingly, the exemption set forth in Section 15061(b)(3) applies.

SECTION 3. Code Amendment.

A. Chapter 2.28, entitled “Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission”, of the Malibu Municipal Code is hereby repealed.

B. Chapter 5.16, entitled, “Mobilehome Park Rent Control Regulations”, of the Malibu Municipal Code is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as provided in Exhibit “A” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 4. Effect on Administrative Regulations.

All regulations adopted to implement Chapters 2.28 and 5.16 are hereby repealed and the Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission and City Staff are directed to adopt new regulations as specified in the provisions of new Chapter 5.16 of the MMC.

SECTION 5. Effective Date.

This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days following adoption by the City Council. 18 Ordinance No. 532

Page 3 of 26 ends

____________________

SECTION 6. Severability.

Should any section, subsection, clause, or provision of this Ordinance for any reason be held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality or the remaining portions of this Ordinance; it being hereby expressly declared and this Ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, and ratified irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 7. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance.

PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this _______ day of ___________ 2026. _____________________________
MARIANNE RIGGINS, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
KELSEY PETTIJOHN, City Clerk
(seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
TREVOR RUSIN, Interim City Attorney
19 Ordinance No. 532

Page 4 of 26 ends

____________________

Exhibit A
§ 5.16.010. Purpose of provisions.

There continues to be a shortage of mobilehome spaces in the area that is now the city of Malibu. Because of this shortage, there is a low vacancy rate and rents are presently rising and causing concern among a substantial number of mobilehome park residents.

Because of the high cost of moving mobilehomes; the potential for damage resulting therefrom; the requirements relating to the installation of mobilehomes, including permits, landscaping and site preparation; the lack of alternative homesites for mobilehome residents; and the substantial investment of homeowners in such homes, a virtual monopoly exists in the rental of mobilehome park spaces, creating a situation where park owners have unbridled discretion and ability to exploit mobilehome park residents and homeowners. There continues to be a shortage of affordable housing in the City of Malibu. Mobile homes often represent the most affordable housing in the City of Malibu for residents and homeowners alike. The City of Malibu has an interest in maintaining affordable housing within its boundaries to, among other things, protect its aging residents and promote economic diversity.

B. Homeowners are in the unique position of having made a substantial investment in a mobilehome that is situated on land that is rented or leased. In this situation both the park owner and the homeowner have a financial stake in the relationship.

C. Additionally, because park space is virtually unavailable and relocating difficult and costly, the closure of a mobilehome park or its change of use has disastrous implications or results for homeowners, who may find it impossible to relocate to a comparable park.

In addition, the city council finds that it is necessary to provide for the preparation and approval of reports evaluating the impact of changes of use of the parks and provide for measures to mitigate the impact on residents of these changes of use. 20 Ordinance No. 532

Page 5 of 26 ends

____________________

§ 5.16.020. Definitions.
"Base rent" means the space rent charged on March 28, 1991. "Capital improvements" means the park owner's cost of constructing new improvements or replacing old improvements in the mobilehome park, subject to the following limitations:

1. The improvement must: have a life expectancy of five years or more and must be treated as capital improvements for federal and state income tax purposes, and may not be deducted for such tax purposes as expenses.

2. Normal routine maintenance and repair are not capital improvements.

3. Insured repairs and replacement are not capital improvements.

4. The improvements must be permanently fixed in place or relatively immobile.

5. Those improvements that the park owner intends to pass through to the homeowner through special and limited rent increases, except for necessary infrastructure improvements, must be approved by 50% plus one of the homeowners. "Capital improvements" include construction, installation or replacement of all or a portion of a club-house, laundry facility or other common area facilities a swimming pool, sauna, hot tub or other recreational amenities, streets, security gates, outdoor or common area lighting, retaining walls, sewer, electrical, plumbing, water or television reception systems, sprinkler systems, or any addition to or upgrade of existing improvements.
"Commission" means the mobilehome park rent stabilization commission, as established by this chapter.
"CPI" means the Consumer Price Index (All Items) prepared by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim area or any successor Consumer Price Index indicated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to the aforementioned area relating to all urban consumers and includes Malibu in its geographic area.

CPI Adjustment Period. In December of each year, the city manager shall calculate and furnish a figure constituting the CPI change for use as the basis of rent increases. Such figure need only be based upon available data. This figure shall be based on the changes in the CPI during the last available 12-month period (from November to November) for which information is available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics prior to the effective date of the base rent or current space rent.
"Gross income" means and includes the following:

1. Gross rent, computed as gross rental income at 100% paid occupancy; plus

2. Interest from rental deposits, unless directly paid by the park owner to the homeowner (interest shall be imputed at the rate of five and one-half percent of all deposits, unless such deposits earn greater interest); plus
21 Ordinance No. 532

Page 6 of 26 ends

____________________

3. Income from laundry facilities, cleaning fees or services, garage and parking fees attributable to mobilehome spaces; plus

4. All other income or consideration received or receivable for, or in connection with the housing services; minus

5. Uncollected rents due to vacancy and bad debts, to the extent that the same are beyond the owner's control. Uncollected rents in excess of three percent of gross rents shall be presumed to be unreasonable, unless proven otherwise. Where uncollected rent must be proven, the average of the preceding three years' experience shall be used, or other comparable method.
"Homeowner" means any person entitled to occupy a mobilehome which is located within a mobilehome park in the city.
"Housing services" means services provided by the park owner related to the use or occupancy of a mobilehome space, including, but not limited to, water and sewer, natural gas, electricity, refuse removal, management and administration (including employee salaries and fringe benefits), maintenance and repairs, supplies, advertising, recreation facilities, laundry facilities, parking, security services, insurance, property taxes, governmental assessments, and other costs reasonably attributable to the operation of the mobilehome park. The term "housing services" shall not include legal fees or mortgage payments, whether for principal, interest, or both. "Mobilehome" has the same definition given in the Mobilehome Residency Law, specifically Civil Code Section 798.3, and includes a structure designed for human habitation and for being moved on a street or highway to a-permanent occupancy site, and installed on the site either with or-without a permanent foundation. "Mobilehome" includes a manufactured home, as defined in the Health and Safety Code, but does not include either a recreational vehicle, a commercial coach, or factory built housing as they are defined in the Health and Safety Code. "Mobilehome park" means an area of land where two or more mobilehome spaces are rented, or held out for rent, to accommodate mobilehomes used for human habitation. "Mobilehome park owner" or "park owner" means the owner, lessor, operator or manager of a mobilehome park in the city.
"Necessary infrastructure improvements" means maintenance (such as replacement of a necessary component of a system or improvement, and other than normal maintenance or repair which constitute "operating expenses" pursuant to this section) of streets, electrical, gas, plumbing, sewer or water systems, except the costs of replacement or repair incurred or required as a result of the park owners negligence.
"Operating expenses" shall include the following:

1. Real property taxes;

2. Utility costs;
22 Ordinance No. 532

Page 7 of 26 ends

____________________

3. Management expenses (contracted or park owner-performed), including necessary and reasonable advertising, accounting, insurance, and other managerial expenses.

Management expenses are presumed to be five percent of gross income, unless established otherwise;

4. Normal repair and maintenance expenses, including painting, normal cleaning, fumigation, landscaping, and repair of all standard services, including electrical, plumbing, carpentry, furnished appliances, drapes, carpets and furniture;

5. Park owner performed labor, which shall be compensated at a reasonable hourly rate, based upon documentation being provided, showing the date, time and nature of the work performed, and the actual cost of the labor;

6. License and registration fees required by law, to the extent same are not otherwise paid by homeowners;

7. Capital expenses with a total cost of less than $100 per year, benefited unit, and the amortized portion of other capital expenses otherwise allowed by regulation.

"Operating expenses" shall not include:

1. Avoidable and unnecessary expenses since the base year, including refinancing costs;

2. Mortgage principal and interest payments;

3. Any penalty, fees or interest assessed or awarded for violation of this or any other law;

4. Legal fees;

5. Depreciation of the property;

6. Any expense for which the park owner has been reimbursed by any security deposit, insurance settlement, judgment for damages, settlement or any other method;

7. Land lease payments;

8. Cost of replacement or repair incurred or necessary as a result of the park owner's negligence or failure to maintain. ;

9. Property tax increases arising from, or attributable to, any transfer of the property. "Space rent" means the consideration on a monthly basis, including any bonuses, benefits or gratuities, demanded or received in connection with the use and occupancy of a mobilehome space in a mobilehome park, or for housing services provided, but exclusive of:

1. Any amount paid for the use of a mobilehome;

2. Security deposits and special and limited rent increases;

3. User fees for services or facilities which may be utilized at the option of the homeowners and are not included in monthly space rent; and

4. Utility charges for those mobilehome parks which bill homeowners separately whether or not the mobilehomes are individually metered. "Sublessor" means any person or entity that rents a mobilehome, sited in a mobilehome park, to another person or entity.
23 Ordinance No. 532

Page 8 of 26 ends

____________________

"Subtenant" means any person or entity that rents a mobilehome, sited in a mobilehome park, from another person or entity.
§ 5.16.030. Exemptions.

The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following tenancies in mobilehome parks located in the city, except that all tenancies in mobilehome parks shall be subject to the registration provisions of Sections 5.16.060 and 5.16.070:

A. Mobilehome parks managed or operated by the United States Government, the state of California, the county of Los Angeles or the City of Malibu; and B. Tenancies for which any federal or state law or regulation specifically prohibits rent regulations, to the extent of such prohibition.
§ 5.16.040. Mobilehome park rent stabilization commission—Establishment and organization.

A. There is established a commission to be known as the "Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent Stabilization Commission." The commission shall be comprised of five residents of the city. Each member of the city council shall appoint one member of the commission to serve at the pleasure of the appointing councilmember. Appointments shall be made at a regular city council meeting. Vacancies on the mobilehome park rent stabilization commission shall be filled by appointment at a regular city council meeting by the individual councilmember who made the appointment to the seat which is vacant. In no event shall any member of the commission be or, at any time during the previous one year have been, directly or indirectly, a park owner (including an owner of at least fivepercent of an entity that owns a park), homeowner, or employee, officer, or director of the same.

B. The city manager shall provide all administrative staff necessary to serve the commission.

The city clerk shall serve as secretary of the commission and shall be responsible for the maintenance of all records of the commission. The secretary shall keep a record of its proceedings, which shall be open for inspection by any member of the public. The city attorney or the designee of the city attorney shall act as legal counsel to the commission.

The city manager and city clerk may designate other staff members to exercise the power and duties designated to them in this Chapter.

C. The city manager shall be responsible for setting and posting the agenda for all meetings of the commission. The city manager shall timely bring items within the commission’s jurisdiction before it and shall work with the commission and its Chair. The city manager shall make the determination of which items are posted on the agenda, and how staff resources are used to support the Commission.
§ 5.16.050. Term.
24 Ordinance No. 532

Page 9 of 26 ends

____________________

Each member of the mobilehome park rent stabilization commission shall serve a four-year term.

Commissioners shall be appointed at a regular city council meeting following the general municipal election at which the appointing councilmember was elected. In the event the office of any appointing councilmember becomes vacant during the term thereof, the term of the commissioner appointed by such councilmember shall terminate 90 days after such vacancy occurs. Following expiration of the term of office, each commissioner shall continue to serve until his or her successor is appointed and qualified. Notwithstanding any provision of this code, each commissioner shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing councilmember and may be removed by that councilmember at a regular city council meeting. § 5.16.060. Mobilehome park rent stabilization commission—Powers and duties.

Within the limitations provided by law, the, commission shall have the following powers and duties:

A. To receive, investigate, hold hearings on, and pass upon all issues relating to mobilehome park rent stabilization, as set forth in this chapter; B. To make or conduct such independent hearings or investigations as may be appropriate to obtain such information as is necessary to carry out its duties; C. To adjust space rents either upward or downward prospectively and, consistent with State Law, retroactively for up to three years from the date of the submittal of an application, consistent with the provisions of this Chapter; and D. To adopt, promulgate, amend and rescind administrative rules governing the conduct of commission hearings of this chapter.
§ 5.16.070. Registration. – Annual process administered by City Manager Office A. Registration Required. Within 60 calendar days after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter and on or before every December 31 thereafter, park owners shall register all mobilehome park spaces with the city manager. No park owners shall be eligible to receive any rent increases as provided for in this chapter unless current registration information is on file with the city manager.

B. Initial Registration. The initial registration under this Section shall include the names, business addresses, and business telephone numbers of each person or legal entity possessing an ownership interest in the park and the nature of that interest, and all lienholders, (no later than 30 days after acquiring such interest); the number of mobilehome spaces within the park; the name and address of each resident; a rent schedule reflecting space rents within the park on December 31, 1984, for all spaces not exempt from this chapter pursuant to Section 5.16.030; a listing of all other charges, including utilities, now included in space rent, paid by homeowners and the approximate amount of each such charge; a list of all spaces exempt from this chapter pursuant to Section 5.16.030 and the reason for the exemption; and the name and address to which all required notices and correspondence may be sent. 25 Ordinance No. 532

Page 10 of 26 ends

____________________

C. Determination of Rents. The city manager shall determine the base rent. The decision of the city manager may be appealed to the commission. The decision of the city manager, or the commission on appeal, shall be final. The city manager may promulgate regulations necessary to effectuate the purpose of this section.

D. Re-registration.

1. The city manager may require re-registration as deemed reasonable or necessary and may promulgate regulations to effectuate the purpose of this section.

2. The registration requirements provided in this section or which may be established by the city shall apply to all mobilehome parks and mobilehome park spaces, including those exempted from the provisions of this chapter by reason of the existence of a valid rental agreement.

E. The registrations required under this Section shall be maintained by the city manager, and shall be subject to inspection by the Commission and any homeowner upon request.
§ 5.16.080. Subleasing in Mobilehome Parks.

A park owner may prohibit a homeowner from subleasing their mobilehome unless contrary to the MRL or other applicable law. A park owner may not retaliate against the homeowner for subleasing their mobilehome if the homeowner was permitted to do so. § 5.16.090. Registration and administrative fees.

A. Establishment of Registration Fee. At the time of initial registration or any subsequent registration, park owners shall pay to the city such registration fee for each mobilehome rental space within the park as may be established by resolution of the city council (not to exceed the reasonable and necessary costs of administration of this chapter). The city council may also provide that up to two thirds of that fee may be passed through to homeowners as special and limited rent increases if apportioned equally among the spaces and charged in 12 equal consecutive installments.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, where the total annual amount of the fee to be passed through to each homeowner is less than $48, the park owner may elect to recover the fee from the homeowners in one lump sum rather than in equal monthly installments.

B. Late Charge. If a park owner does not pay the fee provided for in subsection A of this section within the time period established by the city council, a late charge shall be assessed in an amount established by resolution. No late charges may be passed through as special and limited rent increases to homeowners.

C. Unpaid Fee. No hearing or other proceedings shall be scheduled to take place, and no rent increase will be granted or will take effect for any mobilehome park for which there are unpaid registration fees.
26 Ordinance No. 532

Page 11 of 26 ends

____________________

D. Purpose of the Fee. The registration fee provided for by this section is intended to defray the reasonable and necessary costs associated with the administration of this chapter and the regulations promulgated pursuant thereto.

E. Other Administrative Fees. The city council may set by resolution other administrative fees to cover the reasonable costs of processing various requests and appeals, as it deems necessary.
§ 5.16.100. Rent increases—Commission approval.

On or after March 28, 1991, no increase in space rents in excess of the amounts permitted pursuant to Section 5.16.120 (A) and (B), which are implemented by the city manager, shall be effective unless approved by the commission as set forth in this chapter. § 5.16.110. Rent adjustments – Applications.

The city manager shall be responsible for processing rent adjustment applications permitted under this chapter and for the development of any materials or regulations necessary for its administration.
§ 5.16.120. Rent increases—Computation and determination.

A. Formula Increases. Space rents may be increased automatically and annually by no more than the total percentage change in the CPI for the applicable CPI adjustment period as determined by the city manager, except that space rent shall not be increased by more than five percent and may be increased by up to two percent.

Calculation of the one-year limitation on formula increases shall be from the date the last formula increase became effective for that particular space. The city manager may promulgate regulations to effectuate the purpose of this subsection.

B. Vacancy Increases. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A of this section, upon vacancy, space rent may be increased up to fifteen percent of the then current maximum allowable rent permitted by this chapter prior to the vacancy. Upon application, the city manager shall calculate and determine the correct amount of the vacancy increase and may promulgate regulations to effectuate the purpose of this subsection.

C. Special and Limited Rent and Rent Increases.

1. Government Required Services. The homeowner shall pay to the park owner, on the herein described terms, no less than 60 days after the park owner has notified the homeowner in writing, the increased costs to the park owner of government required services, which are to be included as part of the homeowner's rent but separately listed items on the monthly statement. a. For the purposes of this chapter, "government required services" shall be defined as services required by governmental agencies which are new or in addition to those services legally required to be provided by the park owner to homeowners or to the mobilehome park on March 28, 1991. 27 Ordinance No. 532

Page 12 of 26 ends

____________________

b. Such services include fees and charges legally levied by an agency of federal, state or local government upon the park owner. Such services do not include predictable expenses for operation of the mobilehome park, such as common-area utilities expenses or expenses which maintain the safe and healthful use of mobilehome park facilities.
c. The park owner's actual out-of-pocket costs of providing government required services may be charged to the homeowner upon 60 days' written notice, using the following formula: Amount actually paid by the park owner, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park, divided by 12 months, equals the sum for government-required services to be charged to the homeowner. Notwithstanding the formula described above, only those costs of providing governmental required services in the 12 months immediately preceding the proposed charge shall be reimbursed to the park owner by the homeowner in the manner herein described. The park owner shall charge the homeowner only those costs for government required services which are not reimbursed to the park owner by insurance or other sources.

2. Capital Improvements.
a. (i) Necessary infrastructure improvements subject only to the provisions of subsection (C)(2)(d) of this section; and (ii) subject to the vote requirements and the capital improvement limitations set forth in Section

5.16.020, and also subject to review by the commission pursuant to Section 5.16.150, the actual net costs of a capital improvement plus an interest charge to compensate the park owner for the use of money in making the improvement, as described below, may be charged to the homeowners upon 60 days' written notice, using the following formula:
net amount actually paid by the park owner for the capital improvement, plus an interest charge as described below, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park affected by the improvement, divided by the amortization period for the capital improvement allowed by the Internal Revenue Service, equals the monthly sum for capital improvements to be charged to the homeowners and billed separately from space rent.
b. The interest charge that may be added to the costs of materials and labor is the current rate derived from the then-current prime interest rate, computed on a declining balance over a five-year period with equal monthly payments (the five-year period represents the amount of time allowed for fully amortizing the cost of capital improvements). c. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (C)(2)(a) of this section and Section 5.16.140, the city manager may approve special and limited rent increases for necessary infrastructure improvements upon a showing by the park owners that the proposed improvement meets the requirements of 28 Ordinance No. 532

Page 13 of 26 ends

____________________

Section 5.16.020 and that the park owner obtained a minimum of three bids from qualified persons/entities to perform the work, if possible, and that the park owner selected the person/entity submitting the lowest responsible bid to perform the work for the proposed necessary infrastructure improvement. No commission review is required or permitted.

D. 1. Sublease Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A of this section, upon sublease of a space and/or lease of a mobilehome, the space rent may be increased up to 15% of the rent otherwise permitted under this chapter. This rent surcharge shall be effective only for the duration of the sublease and shall be eliminated when and if the sublease is terminated. A sublease surcharge shall not become effective until 12 months after the last vacancy increase pursuant to subsection B of this section. The sublease surcharge rent amount shall be calculated separately and shall not be included in the maximum allowable rent for the purposes of calculating formula increases pursuant to subsection A of this section. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to those spaces granted hardship exemptions pursuant to subsection F of this section for as long as the space is eligible for such exemption.

2. Absentee Owner Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection A of this section, in the event that a homeowner does not use his or her mobilehome at a mobilehome park as a primary or principal residence and the homeowner is not otherwise subject to subsection (D)(1) of this section, the homeowner's space rent may be increased up to 15% of the rent otherwise permitted under this chapter. This rent increase shall be effective only until the homeowner occupies his or her mobilehome at the mobilehome park as a primary residence or the homeowner subleases his or her space or mobilehome and becomes subject to subsection (D)(1) of this section. For purposes of this chapter, a primary or principal residence is a residence where the homeowner resides for over 185 days during a calendar year.

E. Sublease Hardship Exemption. Upon application, the city manager may grant a hardship exemption in connection with the sublease surcharge, which exemption shall last for a term of one year. At the expiration of any particular term of the exemption, the applicant may apply to renew the one-year term by again establishing qualification for the exemption. The application and renewal application shall be in the forms provided by the city manager with a copy to the park owner and, shall include sufficient evidence to establish whether the applicant qualifies for an exemption pursuant to this section and shall be signed by the applicant under penalty of perjury. The city manager shall grant the exemption for any qualified applicant.

1. Qualification. To qualify for the sublease hardship exemption, the applicant must satisfy all of the following criteria:
29 Ordinance No. 532

Page 14 of 26 ends

____________________

a. The applicant must own a mobilehome at the applicable park, and must have occupied the mobilehome as his or her primary residence for a minimum of three years prior to applying for this exemption.
b. The applicant must present adequate evidence that he or she would qualify for the Low Income Rate Payer Assistance Program for Submetered Households. c. The combined value of assets owned by the applicant must not exceed $150,000 excluding the value of the mobilehome itself.
d. No person other than the applicant can declare the applicant as a dependent for purposes of federal or state taxes.

In the event that the applicant, after receiving the hardship exemption, at any time ceases to satisfy all of the foregoing criteria, from that point on, the applicant will not be qualified to receive, and shall not receive, the hardship exemption.

2. Effect of Exemption. Each applicant who qualifies for the hardship exemption shall be exempt from the sublease surcharge provided in subsection D of this section. § 5.16.130. Reserved.
§ 5.16.140. Rent adjustments—Commission review.

A. 1. In order to implement a rent increase as permitted under this chapter (except rent increases under Sections 5.16.120(A), (B), or (C)(2)(c) that are administered by the city manager) or a rent decrease based on a reduction of housing services, the applicant must file with the commission a proposed rent schedule on the form provided by the commission. Any proposed capital improvement to be passed through to homeowners must be approved by the commission after the park owner files an application showing the amount of the expense, the amount to be passed through and proof of a majority vote in favor of the special and limited rent increases.

2. Where the park owner is the applicant, the park owner shall serve each affected homeowner, either personally or by certified mail, with written notice of the proposed increase, in accordance with state law, and with notice that a request for approval of same is being filed with the commission. Copies of the rent schedule, request for increase, and supporting documentation shall be available to any homeowner requesting same at the park owner’s office in the affected mobilehome park. Where a homeowner (or homeowners, or organization of homeowners) is the applicant, the homeowner or organization of homeowners shall serve the affected park owner by mail or personally at the address and to the person designated in the registration form submitted by the park owner to receive notices on behalf of the park owner.

Applicants under this subsection (A)(2) shall file proof of such service with the commission concurrent with the filing of their applications. The registration 30 Ordinance No. 532

Page 15 of 26 ends

____________________

information and address for service shall be available to any applicant or potential applicant upon request.

B. If the city manager determines that the application is not complete, or not in compliance with this chapter, within 21 days of the date on which the application was submitted, the city manager shall give written notice of the deficiencies to the applicant. In the event that the city manager or their designee determines that the application is not complete or not in compliance with this chapter, the applicant may correct the identified deficiencies by amending the application and/or contesting the determination to the Commission. Any amendment of an application consistent with this paragraph must be served in the same manner as the application as set forth in paragraph (A)(2) of this Section. No commissioner shall assist an applicant with completing the application form(s). A determination of incompleteness by the city manager may be appealed to the Commission within 10 days of being rendered, and the decision of the Commission appealed to the City Council within 10 days of being rendered.

C. The city manager shall set a hearing on any application complying with the requirements of this chapter no sooner than 30 days and no later than 70 days, and for an application submitted under 5.16.230 no later than 90 days, after the application is accepted as complete. Within 10 days of receipt of a completed application, the city manager shall send written notice to the applicant, who, if the park owner, shall post such notice in a conspicuous place, reasonably selected to provide affected parties notice, of the time and place set for the hearing, and if a homeowner or organization of homeowners, to the person designated in the registration form submitted by the park owner to receive notices on behalf of the park owner. If the commission approves an increase as requested, or lower than requested, the same shall take effect as noticed by the park owner or as the commission may otherwise direct.

D. Homeowner(s) in a mobilehome park may initiate commission review of a proposed land rent increase by filing with the city manager a written petition. The petition shall be in substantially such form and contain such information as may be required by the city manager.
§ 5.16.150. Review hearings.

A. All review hearings conducted by the commission shall be open to the public.

B. All parties to the hearing may have assistance from an attorney or such other person as may be designated by the parties in presenting evidence or arguing their position.

All witnesses shall be sworn in and all testimony shall be under penalty of perjury.

C. In the event that either the affected park owner or the homeowner(s) should fail to appear at the hearing at the specified time and place, the commission: may hear and review such evidence as may be presented and make such decisions as if both parties had been present. All review hearings shall be recorded. Recordings shall be 31 Ordinance No. 532

Page 16 of 26 ends

____________________

preserved for six months, or longer if requested by any party affected by the hearing, or for the duration of any pending litigation or claim.

D. The commission may promulgate regulations to effect the purpose of this section and to ensure hearings are conducted fairly.
§ 5.16.160. Rent adjustments—Commission decision authority.

A. The commission's decision shall be based on the preponderance of the evidence in the record, including the hearing. All parties to the hearing shall be advised of the commission's decision and given a copy of written findings upon which the decision is based. When making a decision, the Commission shall consider reductions or increases to fees, assessments, and charges imposed by a government entity upon a space or by a state or locally mandated program relating to housing contained in the Health and Safety Code.

B. Consistent with its findings, the commission may:

1. Permit a requested increase to become effective, in whole or in part;

2. Deny a requested increase;

3. Order a reduction in rent to a rate determined by the commission; and/or

4. Order that the park owner reimburse the applicant(s) the full amount, or any part of the amount, of the application fee where the applicant(s) for a rent reduction was successful.

C. If the commission finds that an increase, or any portion thereof, that has been collected by a park owner is/was not permissible under this Chapter, the park owner shall refund or credit the overcharged amount to the homeowner within 60 days after the date stated on the commission’s written decision. No refund or credit shall be ordered for any period more than 3 years before the date on which the homeowner filed an application with the commission.

D. Any interested person may appeal a decision of the commission to the city council within 30 days after the date stated on the written decision. The decision shall include the commission’s conclusions and findings. The city council shall review the commission’s decision de novo. The decision of the city council shall be final.

E. Any party disputing the final conclusions and findings of the city council may seek review of the city council’s actions pursuant to Sections 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

F. If the Commission finds that a park owner willfully charged homeowner(s) rent or other amount(s) greater than permitted by this Chapter, the Commission may order payment of up to treble the amount wrongfully charged or five-thousand dollars, whichever is greater. The amount of payment ordered shall be limited to amount wrongfully charged during the 3 years before the date on which the homeowner filed an application with the commission.

G. If the Commission orders a return of rent, as described in subsection (C) or (F), and the park owner fails to pay the amount ordered within 60 days of the Commission’s 32 Ordinance No. 532

Page 17 of 26 ends

____________________

written decision, the homeowner(s) may withhold the amount ordered from their subsequent rent payment(s). If the park owner files an unlawful detainer action against a homeowner for withholding such rent payments, this subsection shall serve as an affirmative defense to eviction.
§ 5.16.170. Hearing—Evidence and procedural irregularities.

Formal rules of evidence or procedure which must be followed in court shall not apply to decision-making body proceedings, except to the extent that the decision-making body shall determine. No action of the decision-making body hereunder shall be held void or invalid or be set aside by any court on the grounds of any improper admission or rejection of evidence, or by reason of any error, irregularity, informality, neglect or omission (hereinafter called "error") as to any matter pertaining to applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, or any matters of procedure whatever, including but not limited to those included in this section, unless after an examination of the entire case, including the evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error complained of was prejudicial, and that by reason of such error the party complaining or appealing sustained and suffered substantial injury, and that a different result would have been probable if such error had not occurred or existed. There shall be no presumption that error is prejudicial or that injury was done if error is shown. § 5.16.180. Implementation guidelines.

After a noticed-public hearing, as it deems necessary, the city council may adopt by resolution guidelines to aid in the implementation of this chapter. § 5.16.190. New and prospective homeowners.

A. Prior to or at the time of agreeing to rent space to a new homeowner in a mobilehome park, the park owner shall provide each new homeowner or prospective homeowner with a notice and copy of the mobilehome park rent stabilization ordinance, as currently in force.

B. No park owner may require, directly or indirectly, that any resident or prospective resident sign a lease or rental agreement that provides that it shall be exempt from local rent control or provides for rent in excess of that permitted by this chapter as a condition of tenancy and no park owner may deny a tenancy to a prospective purchaser of a mobilehome in the park on the ground that the prospective purchaser will not sign such a lease or rental agreement.

C. The notice in paragraph (A) shall contain a place for the homeowner to acknowledge receipt of the notice. The park owner shall sign an acknowledgment that the required notice has been provided and provide the homeowner with a copy of the executed acknowledgment. The park owner shall maintain a copy of the executed acknowledgment as long as the applicable tenancy continues. 33 Ordinance No. 532

Page 18 of 26 ends

____________________

§ 5.16.200. Homeowner's right of refusal.

A homeowner may refuse to pay any increase in rent or other charge which is in violation of this chapter. Such refusal to pay shall be a defense in any action brought to recover possession of a mobilehome or mobilehome space or to collect the rent increase. § 5.16.210. Retaliatory eviction.

Notwithstanding Section 5.16.200, in any action brought to recover possession of a mobilehome space or mobilehome, the court shall consider as grounds for denial any violation of any provision of this chapter. Further, the determination that the action was brought in retaliation for the exercise of any rights conferred by this chapter shall be grounds for denial. Any action brought within one year of an application filed with the commission by the homeowner pursuant to this chapter shall be presumed to be retaliatory; this presumption affects the burden of proof, and is rebuttable by the park owner.
§ 5.16.220. Violation—Civil remedies.

If any park owner demands, accepts, receives or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum lawful space rent, as determined under this chapter, then the homeowners in such mobilehome park affected by such violation, individually or by class action, may seek relief in a court of appropriate jurisdiction for injunctive relief and damages. A prevailing homeowner shall be entitled to recover costs and reasonable attorneys' fees as part of any court judgment. A prevailing park owner shall not recover any costs, unless the court finds the homeowner’s action or defense to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundation. § 5.16.230. Violation—Penalty.
(A)Criminal penalty. Any person violating any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment for a period of not more than six months, or by both. Each violation of any provision of this chapter, and each day during which any such violation is committed, permitted or continued, shall constitute a separate offense. (B) Civil penalty. Any person violating any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement, of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $100 per violation, or $200 per willful violation. Any aggrieved person may file a civil action on behalf of the City of Malibu and other aggrieved persons in a court of competent jurisdiction to recover the civil penalty established by this paragraph, in which case any civil penalties recovered shall be distributed as follows: ten percent to the aggrieved person(s) who filed the action; twenty-five percent to the other aggrieved persons; and sixty-five percent to the City of Malibu for the purpose of enforcing this Chapter and educating the public concerning this Chapter.
34 Ordinance No. 532

Page 19 of 26 ends

____________________

§ 5.16.240. Just and reasonable return.

A park owner may file a rent adjustment application for one, some or all the spaces in a mobilehome park in order to establish the maximum allowable rent or to achieve a fair and reasonable return. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the grant of a rent adjustment upon application by a park owner when required by law to permit a fair and reasonable return to the park owner. The city shall receive relevant evidence, in accordance with applicable regulations, demonstrating that a park owner or sublessor is not receiving a fair and reasonable return in determining these applications. City council regulations shall establish a formula to calculate whether an applicant is entitled to a rent increase to obtain a fair and reasonable return.
§ 5.16.250. Mobilehome park conversion impact reports.

A. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this section is to implement the provisions of state law addressing the adverse impacts on the residents and homeowners in a park which is converted, closed or where the park's use is changed or ceased.

B. Definitions. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply in addition to those listed in Section 5.16.020.
"Advisory agency" means the commission or other authority designated by the City Council.
"Change of use" means a use of a mobilehome park for a purpose other than the rental, or the holding out for rent, of two or more mobilehome sites to accommodate mobilehomes for human habitation. "Change of use" includes, but is not limited to, a change of the park or any portion thereof to a condominium, stock cooperative, or any form of ownership wherein spaces within the park are to be sold, and the cessation of use of all or a portion of the park, whether immediately or on a gradual basis, or the closure of the park. "Change of use" shall not include mere purchase of the park by its existing homeowners.
"Comparable housing" means housing which is comparable in floor space area, deck and lot size, and number of bedrooms and other relevant factors to the mobilehome to which comparison is being made, which housing meets the minimum standards of the State Uniform Housing Code.
"Comparable mobilehome park" means any other mobilehome park substantially equivalent in terms of park condition, amenities, ocean views and beach access and other relevant factors.
"Date of application for change of use" means the date of filing of an application for rezoning, general plan amendment, use permit, site development permit or other discretionary development approval under this code, which application seeks approval of a change of use of a mobilehome park, its closure, or cessation of use. "Eligible homeowner" means a homeowner whose mobilehome or manufactured home was located in a mobilehome park on the date of the application for a change of use.
35 Ordinance No. 532

Page 20 of 26 ends

____________________

C. General Requirements.

1. Any person who files an application for a rezoning, general plan amendment, subdivision map, use permit, site development permit or for any other discretionary development approval, for the purpose of a change of use of a mobilehome park, closure, or cessation of use, shall file with the advisory agency a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessation of use (hereinafter "closure") upon the residents of the mobilehome park who will be displaced, no later than the filing of the first such application necessary to authorize such closure.

2. No application shall be considered or deemed completed or processed for consideration and approval unless and until such conversion impact report shall have been filed as required by this Section.

3. Use of a property as mobilehome park shall not be terminated for the purpose of conversion to another land use or cessation of use until approval by the advisory agency and the city council, or appeal, has been received.

4. No building permit shall be issued on property occupied by a mobilehome park at the effective date of this chapter or after for uses other than those associated with the mobile home park use and allowed under the special use permit, until approval under this section has been received.

5. The park owner shall give any written notice to homeowners required by state law.

D. Conversion Impact Report.

1. The conversion impact report shall include a replacement and relocation plan that addresses the availability of adequate replacement housing in mobilehome parks and the cost of relocating displaced residents.

2. In order to evaluate adequately and address those issues, the conversion impact report shall contain the following information:
a. At the applicant’s expense and if there are displaced residents, an appraisal of the on-site value, depreciated replacement value, and removal value of the mobilehome of each eligible resident in the park. The appraisal must be prepared by a State-certified appraiser, approved by the City, with experience establishing the value of mobilehomes, and shall be based upon the current in-place value of the mobilehome and shall assume the continuation of the mobilehome park. b. The names, addresses and mobilehome site identification numbers of all persons owning mobilehomes within the mobilehome park and of all mobilehome residents on the date of application for change of use; c. The age, including date of manufacture, of each mobilehome within such park, including the type of mobilehome, width characteristics, size, and number identifying the mobilehome site being occupied;
d. A list of vacant mobilehome sites in comparable mobilehome parks within a 50 mile radius of the park which is the subject of the application or request; 36 Ordinance No. 532

Page 21 of 26 ends

____________________

e. The list shall contain a schedule of site rental rates for each park listed and the criteria of the management of each park for acceptance of new homeowners and used mobilehomes;
f. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of one or more housing specialists from the list compiled by the advisory agency, and the names, addresses and telephone numbers and fee schedules of persons qualified as mobilehome movers and of persons who are qualified appraisers of mobilehomes and an explanation of the services the housing specialists will provide;
g. The applicant may designate other housing specialists, and mobilehome movers and appraisers; provided, that use of any such persons pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to approval by the advisory agency;
h. A relocation plan which will include:
i. Timetable for implementing the physical relocation of mobilehomes, ii. Implementation of relocation assistance
iii. Payment of relocation costs, and
iv. The requested “change of use”; conversion of the park to one or more other uses; cessation of use, or closure of the park.

3. The application for change of use shall include within the replacement and relocation plan the steps proposed to mitigate any adverse impact on the ability of displaced homeowners to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park, including the reasonable costs of relocation.
a. All eligible homeowners and all mobilehome tenants of eligible homeowners shall be provided with the services of one or more housing experts to assist them in relocating to available and adequate housing upon their request. Any such experts shall be those approved pursuant to this section.

E. Advisory Agency Determination

1. Before approving a change of use, the advisory agency shall:
a. Review the conversion impact report and any relevant documentation. b. Make a finding as to whether or not approval of the park closure and the park’s conversion into its intended new use, taking into consideration both the impact report as a whole and the overall housing availability within the local jurisdiction, will result in or materially contribute to a shortage of housing opportunities and choices for low- and moderate-income households within the local jurisdiction.

Page 22 of 26 ends

____________________

b. A factor to be considered is if the conversion is to another residential use, the homeowners have first opportunity to occupy and the construction schedule will not result in long-term displacement.

3. An eligible homeowner or tenant of an eligible homeowner may enter a written agreement with the park owner to waive his or her right to benefits specified under statute provided that the park owner gives other benefits comparable to those mandated by statute. To be valid, such waiver shall contain the text of this section and include a signed written acknowledgement that the person waiving his or her rights has read and understands his or her rights pursuant to this chapter and knowingly agrees to waive them.

4. In order to facilitate the intentions of the homeowners or tenants and an applicant for a change of use with regard to a change of use, cessation of use, or closure, the parties may agree to mutually satisfactory relocation assistance. To be valid such an agreement shall be in writing, shall include a provision stating that the homeowner or tenant is aware of the provisions of this chapter, shall include a copy of this chapter as an attachment, shall include a provision in at least 10 point type which clearly states the right to seek and the importance of obtaining an attorney's advice prior to signing the agreement, and shall be drafted in form and content otherwise required by applicable state law. Any person signing such an agreement may rescind it in writing within 10 business days of final approval of change of use. Any such agreement which is procured by fraud, misrepresentation, coercion or duress of any kind shall be void and unenforceable.

F. Hearing and Notice

1. Upon the receipt of an impact report, within 30 days the advisory agency shall examine the same and advise the applicant whether it is complete. When a complete impact report has been filed and accepted by the advisory agency, within 90 days the advisory agency shall set a time, place and date for a public hearing.

2. At least 75 days prior to the public hearing, the advisory agency shall mail notice to the applicant and the homeowners of the date, time and place of the meeting.

3. At least 60 days prior to the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency on the application for change of use and conversion impact report, the applicant shall provide the homeowner and all other persons described with a copy of this chapter, a copy of the conversion impact report, and date and time for an informational meeting pursuant to subsection (E)(4) of this section.

4. At least 30 days prior to the public hearing, the advisory agency shall provide notice to the applicant that:
38 Ordinance No. 532

Page 23 of 26 ends

____________________

a. Notifies the applicant of the provisions of Civil Code Section 798.56 and any local requirements which impose a duty to notify homeowners and subtenants of the proposed change in use; and
b. Specifies the manner in which the applicant must verify that homeowners and subtenants have been notified of the proposed change of use. Neither a hearing on the application, nor any other action thereon, shall be taken by the advisory agency before the applicant has satisfactorily verified that the homeowners and subtenants have been so notified, in the manner prescribed by law or local regulation.

5. Not less than 10 days prior to the date of the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency, the applicant shall conduct an informational meeting for the residents of the mobilehome park regarding the status of the application, the timing of proposed relocation of residents, proposed relocation costs and assistance, and the contents of the conversion impact report. The meeting shall be conducted on the premises of the mobilehome park. The housing specialist(s) designated in the impact report shall be present at such meeting.

6. Within five days prior to the public hearing, the applicant shall file with the advisory agency a statement made under penalty of perjury that all requirements pursuant to subsections (E)(3) and (4) of this section have been complied with and include date, time, and place where such meeting as required by subsection (E)(4) of this section occurred.

G. Findings and Decision. At the conclusion of the hearing, the advisory agency shall render its decision. The advisory agency shall approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the relocation impact report. In approving the relocation impact report, the advisory agency may impose such conditions as it finds necessary to mitigate the adverse impacts on the residents; however, any steps required to be taken by the park owner pursuant to this section shall not exceed the reasonable costs of relocation. Notice of the advisory agency action shall be mailed to the park owner, to all homeowners, to all Subtenants, to all Sublessors, and to all persons who have filed written request therefor.

H. Request for Appeal. The park owner, any homeowner, any Subtenant, or any Sublessor may appeal the advisory agency's decision to the city council. The appeal shall be filed with the city on a form provided for that purpose within 10 days after the action of the advisory agency. When an appeal is filed, it shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount determined according to Section 5.16.070. The city shall, within 45 days, set a time and date for a hearing, and shall mail written notice of such hearing to the park owner, all homeowners, all Subtenants, all Sublessors, the person requesting the hearing, the advisory agency and all persons who have filed written request therefor, at least 15 days prior to the hearing.
39 Ordinance No. 532

Page 24 of 26 ends

____________________

For all requests for hearing, the city council may sustain, modify, reject or overrule any recommendations or rulings of the advisory agency and may make such findings as are not inconsistent with the provisions of this section.

I. Extensions. Any of the time limits specified in this section may be extended by the advisory agency, or the city council, on appeal, with notice to affected parties, except where prohibited by state law.

J. Expiration and Extension of Conversion Impact Report. The approval of a conversion impact report shall become null and void after 36 months from the date of the mailing of the final approval of the conversion impact report. Thereafter, the park owner shall not convert, close or cease the use of the park until such time as a new conversion impact report is approved. However, upon application of the park owner, filed with the advisory agency on or before the date of expiration, the conversion impact report may be extended by the advisory agency up to an additional 36 months. An application for an extension shall be subject to the notice and hearing procedures of this section.

K. Conditions. In the approval of a mobilehome park conversion, the city may attach conditions deemed reasonable in order to mitigate the impacts associated with the conversion. Such conditions shall not be limited to, but may include, the following:

1. If the land occupied by the park is to be sold, the homeowners shall be given the right of first negotiation (from the seller) and matching rights (right of last refusal) for the purchase of the park and all the improvements.

2. The homeowners be given the option of a long-term lease of the land and purchase of the improvements.

3. The city may attach an effective date upon their approval of the conversion. This date will provide sufficient time for the relocation of the mobilehome to other parks.

L. Revocation and Amendment. Any time prior to the change of use, cessation of use, or closure of the mobilehome park, the advisory agency may, in its discretion, and upon good cause shown, initiate proceedings for the revocation or amendment of the approval of the application for change of use. Good cause may include, but is not limited to, change of circumstances which render the conditions or requirements of the conversion impact report no longer necessary or appropriate, negligent or fraudulent misrepresentation of fact relating to the conversion impact report, or noncompliance with the conditions of the conversion impact report. Prior to revoking or amending the approval of the application, the advisory agency shall conduct a hearing in accordance with the applicable procedures set forth in subsection F of this section. Upon revocation, the park owner shall not convert, close, cease or change the use of the park until such time as a new conversion impact report is approved or other requirement under this Chapter is satisfied. Such revocation or amendment is subject to the same request for hearing as is provided in subsection H of this section. 40 Ordinance No. 532

Page 25 of 26 ends

____________________

M. Evictions Pending Compliance with Conversion Impact Report. Termination of a tenancy of any homeowner or subtenant pursuant to any provision of law shall not relieve the park owner of its obligation to comply with the conditions or requirements of the conversion impact report applicable to that homeowner or subtenant.

N. Additional Authority of the Advisory Agency. If, notwithstanding the fact that the park owner has not served the applicable notice of termination of tenancy on the homeowners, the advisory agency finds that the park owner is attempting to close or convert a park, then the advisory agency shall require the filing of a conversion impact report.

O. Obligations of Applicant After Approval of the Application for Change of Use and Conversion Impact Report. After the date of the final determination approving the conversion impact report and change of use application, the applicant shall undertake or be responsible for performance of the following obligations:

1. Not later than 30 days from the date of such determination, the housing specialist or specialists shall make personal contact with each homeowner and Subtenant of the mobilehome park and commence consultations to determine the applicable costs and assistance to be provided. The housing specialist or specialists shall give each homeowner, Subtenant and former resident eligible to receive relocation assistance written notice of his or her rights to relocation assistance as determined by the city under this chapter.

2. Not less than 120 days prior to the date any homeowner is required to vacate the mobilehome park, any cash or monetary relocation costs required by this chapter shall be paid to such homeowner, to such Subtenant, to any former resident eligible for such costs, or to any person, firm or corporation performing relocation related services for the homeowner or Subtenant, as the homeowner or Subtenant may direct. If the applicant purchases the mobilehome the homeowner shall be required to promptly submit to the applicant all documents necessary to transfer complete title and ownership of such mobilehome to the applicant, free and clear of all security interest, liens, or other encumbrances.

3. The date upon which any resident of the mobilehome park is required to vacate such park, or upon which any mobilehome is required to be removed from the mobilehome park, shall be not less than 12 months from the date of notice of termination of tenancy pursuant to Civil Code Section 798.56(a)(7)(B)(i). The applicant shall provide homeowners with a copy of the final impact report at the same time the 12-months’ notice of termination of tenancy is provided.

4. If the owner of the mobilehome park, the applicant homeowner or tenant specifically requests that any of the time limitations required by this section, except those provided by State law, be modified, the advisory agency, or City Council on appeal, shall consider any such modification and evidence relating to the need therefor at the public hearing on the change of use application and conversion impact report. The advisory 41 Ordinance No. 532

Page 26 of 26 ends

____________________

agency, or City Council on appeal, shall have the power to make modification in such time limits, both in response to a request and on its own motion, in conjunction with any approval of an application and conversion impact report, as it may deem just and reasonable.

P. Payment of Relocation Assistance Benefits—Prerequisite to Issuance of Building Permit to Redevelop Park. No building permit shall be issued for the development of any real property which has been or is being converted from a mobilehome park pursuant to this chapter unless and until the applicant or the owner of the property, as the case may be, who is responsible for payment of any required monetary relocation assistance, shall have filed with the advisory agency a verified statement made under penalty of perjury that relocation assistance payments required pursuant to this chapter have been paid.

Such statement shall specify in itemized form each payee, the amount paid, the date of payment, and the type of relocation or other assistance for which each such payment was made.

Q. Violations. Violations of this section shall constitute a misdemeanor. In addition, any park owner or sublessor who violates any rights of any homeowner or subtenant established under this section shall be liable to the person for actual damages caused by such violation, plus costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. No park owner shall take any willful action to threaten, retaliate against or harass any homeowner with the intent to prevent such homeowner from exercising their rights under this section. 42 § 5.16.010. Purpose of provisions.

A. When the county of Los Angeles adopted Chapter 8.57 of the Los Angeles County Code (Ordinance No. 87-0228) to regulate mobilehome parks in the unincorporated areas of the county, the county found that there was within the county of Los Angeles a shortage of spaces for the locaƟon of mobilehomes. The area that is now the city of Malibu was previously part of the unincorporated area of the county and was subject to Chapter 8.57 of the Los Angeles County Code. The city of Malibu incorporated on March 28, 1991. There conƟnues to be a shortage of mobilehome spaces in the area that is now the city of Malibu. Because of this shortage, there is a low vacancy rate and rents are presently rising and causing concern among a substanƟal number of mobilehome park residents. Because of the high cost of moving mobilehomes; the potenƟal for damage resulƟng therefrom; the requirements relaƟng to the installaƟon of mobilehomes, including permits, landscaping and site preparaƟon; the lack of alternaƟve homesites for mobilehome residents; and the substanƟal investment of homeowners in such homes, a virtual monopoly exists in the rental of mobilehome park spaces, creaƟng a situaƟon where park owners have unbridled discreƟon and ability to exploit mobilehome park residents and homeowners. There conƟnues to be a shortage of affordable housing in the City of Malibu. Mobile homes oŌen represent the most affordable housing in the City of Malibu for residents and homeowners alike. The City of Malibu has an interest in maintaining affordable housing within its boundaries to, among other things, protect its aging residents and promote economic diversity.

B. Homeowners are in the unique posiƟon of having made a substanƟal investment in a mobilehome that is situated on land that is rented or leased. In this situaƟon both the park owner and the homeowner have a financial stake in the relaƟonship.

C. AddiƟonally, because park space is virtually unavailable and relocaƟng difficult and costly, the closure of a mobilehome park or its change of use has disastrous implicaƟons or results for homeowners, who may find it impossible to relocate to a comparable park.

D. For these reasons, among others, the city council finds and declares it necessary to protect the owners and occupiers of mobilehomes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same Ɵme recognizing the need of park owners to receive a fair return on their property. In addiƟon, the city council finds that it is necessary to provide for the preparaƟon and approval of reports evaluaƟng the impact of changes of use of the parks and provide for measures to miƟgate the impact on residents of these changes of use.
§ 5.16.020. DefiniƟons.
"Allowable legal expenses" means aƩorney's fees and costs incurred in connecƟon with successful goodfaith aƩempts to recover rents owing, and successful good-faith unlawful detainer acƟons not in derogaƟon of applicable law, to the extent same are not recovered from homeowners. AƩorney's fees and costs incurred in proceedings before the commission, or in connecƟon with civil acƟons against the commission, are not allow-able as operaƟng expenses.

Attachment 2
43 "Base rent" means: (1) for spaces not subject to a long term lease that complies with the provisions of Civil Code SecƟon 798.17, the space rent charged on March 28, 1991; and (2) for spaces subject to valid long term leases on March 28, 1991, which leases comply with the provisions of Civil Code SecƟon 798.17, the last space rent charged under the long term lease.. "Capital improvements" means the park owner's cost of construcƟng new improvements or replacing old improvements in the mobilehome park, subject to the following limitaƟons:

2. Normal rouƟne maintenance and repair are not capital improvements.

3. Insured repairs and replacement are not capital improvements.

4. The improvements must be permanently fixed in place or relaƟvely immobile.

5. Those improvements that the park owner intends to pass through to the homeowner through special and limited rent increases, except for necessary infrastructure improvements, must be approved by 50% plus one of the homeowners.
"Capital improvements" include construcƟon, installaƟon or replacement of all or a porƟon of a clubhouse, laundry facility or other common area faciliƟes a swimming pool, sauna, hot tub or other recreaƟonal ameniƟes, streets, security gates, outdoor or common area lighƟng, retaining walls, sewer, electrical, plumbing, water or television recepƟon systems, sprinkler systems, or any addiƟon to or upgrade of exisƟng improvements.
"Commission" means the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission, as established by this chapter. "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index (All Items) prepared by the Bureau of Labor StaƟsƟcs for the Los Angeles-Anaheim-Riverside area relaƟng to all urban consumers. If the method of calculaƟng the CPI is substanƟally revised aŌer the adopƟon of the ordinance codified in this chapter, the method in effect upon adopƟon of such ordinance shall conƟnue to be used, or the revised CPI shall be adjusted by the city to correspond to that method.Long Beach-Anaheim area or any successor Consumer Price Index indicated by the Bureau of Labor StaƟsƟcs to the aforemenƟoned area relaƟng to all urban consumers and includes Malibu in its geographic area.

CPI Adjustment Period. TheIn December of each year, the city manager shall calculate and furnish a figure consƟtuƟng the CPI change for use as the basis of rent increases. Such figure need only be based upon available data. This figure shall be based on the changes in the CPI during the last available 12- month period (from November to November) for which informaƟon is available from the Bureau of Labor StaƟsƟcs prior to the effecƟve date of the base rent or current space rent. "Gross income" means and includes the following:

1. Gross rent, computed as gross rental income at 100% paid occupancy; plus

3. Income from laundry faciliƟes, cleaning fees or services, garage and parking fees aƩributable to mobilehome spaces; plus
44 4. All other income or consideraƟon received or receivable for, or in connecƟon with the housing services; minus

5. Uncollected rents due to vacancy and bad debts, to the extent that the same are beyond the owner's control. Uncollected rents in excess of three percent of gross rents shall be presumed to be unreasonable, unless proven otherwise. Where uncollected rent must be proven, the average of the preceding three years' experience shall be used, or other comparable method.
"Homeowner" means any person enƟtled to occupy a mobilehome which is located within a mobilehome park in the city.
"Housing services" means services provided by the park owner related to the use or occupancy of a mobilehome space, including, but not limited to, water and sewer, natural gas, electricity, refuse removal, management and administraƟon (including employee salaries and fringe benefits), maintenance and repairs, supplies, adverƟsing, recreaƟon faciliƟes, laundry faciliƟes, parking, security services, insurance, property taxes, governmental assessments, and other costs reasonably aƩributable to the operaƟon of the mobilehome park. The term "housing services" shall not include legal fees or mortgage payments, whether for principal, interest, or both. "Mobilehome" meanshas the same definiƟon given in the Mobilehome Residency Law, specifically Civil Code SecƟon 798.3, and includes a structure designated or designed for human habitaƟon, transported over the high-ways and for being moved on a street or highway to a-permanent occupancy site, and installed on the site either with or-without a permanent foundaƟon. "Mobile-homeMobilehome" includes a manufactured home, as defined in the Health and Safety Code, but does not include either a recreaƟonal vehicle or, a commercial coach, or factory built housing as they are defined in the Health and Safety Code.
"Mobilehome park" means an area of land where two or more mobilehome spaces are rented, or leasedheld out for rent, to accommodate mobilehomes used as residences. "Mobilehome park" does not include developments which sell lots for mobilehomes or which provide condominium ownership of such lots, even if one or more homes in the development are rented or leased out.human habitaƟon. "Mobilehome park owner" or "park owner" means the owner, lessor, operator or manager of a mobilehome park in the city.
"Necessary infrastructure improvements" means maintenance (such as replacement of a necessary component of a system or improvement, and other than normal maintenance or repair which consƟtute "operaƟng expenses" pursuant to this secƟon) of streets, electrical, gas, plumbing, sewer or water systems, except thaƩhe costs of replacement or repair incurred or required as a result of the park owners negligence.
"OperaƟng expenses" shall include the following:

1. Real property taxes;

2. UƟlity costs;

3. Management expenses (contracted or park owner-performed), including necessary and reasonable adverƟsing, accounƟng, insurance, and other managerial expenses, and 45 allowable legal expenses.. Management expenses are presumed to be five percent of gross income, unless established otherwise;

4. Normal repair and maintenance expenses, including painƟng, normal cleaning, fumigaƟon, landscaping, and repair of all standard services, including electrical, plumbing, carpentry, furnished appliances, drapes, carpets and furniture;

5. Park owner performed labor, which shall be compensated at a reasonable hourly rate, based upon documentaƟon being provided, showing the date, Ɵme and nature of the work performed;, and the actual cost of the labor;

6. License and registraƟon fees required by law, to the extent same are not otherwise paid by homeowners;

7. Capital expenses with a total cost of less than $100 per year, benefited unit, and the amorƟzed porƟon of other capital expenses otherwise allowed by regulaƟon. "OperaƟng expenses" shall not include:

1. Avoidable and unnecessary expenses since the base year, including refinancing costs;

2. Mortgage principal and interest payments;

3. Any penalty, fees or interest assessed or awarded for violaƟon of this or any other law;

4. Legal fees, except allowable legal expenses as defined in this secƟon;;

5. DepreciaƟon of the property;

6. Any expense for which the park owner has been reimbursed by any security deposit, insurance seƩlement, judgment for damages, seƩlement or any other method;

7. Land lease payments;

8. Cost of replacement or repair incurred or necessary as a result of the park owner's negligence or failure to maintain. ;

9. Property tax increases arising from, or aƩributable to, any transfer of the property. "Space rent" means the consideraƟon on a monthly basis, including any bonuses, benefits or gratuiƟes, demanded or received in connecƟon with the use and occupancy of a mobilehome space in a mobilehome park, or for housing services provided, but exclusive of:

1. Any amount paid for the use of a mobilehome;

2. Security deposits and special and limited rent increases;

3. User fees for services or faciliƟes which may be uƟlized at the opƟon of the homeowners and are not included in monthly space rent; and

4. UƟlity charges for those mobilehome parks which bill homeowners separately whether or not the mobilehomes are individually metered.
"Sublessor" means any person or enƟty that rents a mobilehome, sited in a mobilehome park, to another person or enƟty.
"Subtenant" means any person or enƟty that rents a mobilehome, sited in a mobilehome park, from another person or enƟty.
§ 5.16.030. ExempƟons.
46 The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following tenancies in mobilehome parks located in the city, except that all tenancies in mobilehome parks shall be subject to the registraƟon provisions of SecƟons 5.16.060 and 5.16.070:

A. Mobilehome park spaces rented for nonresidenƟal uses; A. Mobilehome parks managed or operated by the United States Government, the state of California, the county of Los Angeles or the cityCity of Malibu; and B. Tenancies which do not exceed an occupancy of 20 days and which do not contemplate an occupancy of more than 20 days;
C. Tenancies for which any federal or state law or regulaƟon specifically prohibits rent regulaƟons;
D. Tenancies subject, to rental agreements exempt from local ordinances pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon 798.17; and
B. Tenancies covered by leases or rental agreements exisƟng at the effecƟve date of the ordinance codified in this chapter which are not exempt pursuant to subsecƟon E of this secƟon, but only for the duraƟonextent of such leases or rental agreements. Upon the expiraƟon or other terminaƟon of such lease or rental agreement, this chapter shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy, unless that lease or rental agreement immediately succeeded by a lease or rental agreement referred to in subsecƟon E of this secƟon.prohibiƟon.
§ 5.16.040. Mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission—Establishment and organizaƟon.

A. There is established a commission to be known as the "Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent StabilizaƟon Commission." The commission shall be comprised of five residents of the city. AEach member of the city council shall appoint one member of the commission shall be appointed to a vacant posiƟon by four-fiŌhs vote of the city council and serve at the pleasure of the appoinƟng councilmember. Appointments shall be made at a regular city council. meeƟng. Vacancies on the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission shall be filled by appointment at a regular city council meeƟng by the individual councilmember who made the appointment to the seat which is vacant. In no event shall any member of the commission be or, at any Ɵme during the immediately five yearsprevious one year have been, directly or indirectly, a park owner or (including an owner of at least five-percent of an enƟty that owns a park), homeowner., or employee, officer, or director of the same.

B. The city manager shall provide all administraƟve staff necessary to serve the commission. The city clerk shall serve as secretary of the commission and shall be responsible for the maintenance of all records of the commission. The secretary shall keep a record of its proceedings, which shall be open for inspecƟon by any member of the public. The city aƩorney or the designee of the city aƩorney shall act as legal counsel to the commission. The city manager and city clerk may designate other staff members to exercise the power and duƟes designated to them in this Chapter.

C. The city manager shall be responsible for seƫng and posƟng the agenda for all meeƟngs of the commission. The city manager shall Ɵmely bring items within the commission’s jurisdicƟon 47 before it and shall work with the commission and its Chair. The city manager shall make the determinaƟon of which items are posted on the agenda, and how staff resources are used to support the Commission.
§ 5.16.050. Term.

Each member of the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission shall serve a four-year term.

Commissioners shall be appointed at a regular city council meeƟng following the general municipal elecƟon at which the appoinƟng councilmember was elected. In the event the office of any appoinƟng councilmember becomes vacant during the term thereof, the term of the commissioner appointed by such councilmember shall terminate 90 days aŌer such vacancy occurs. Following expiraƟon of the term of office, each commissioner shall conƟnue to serve unƟl his or her successor is appointed and qualified.

Notwithstanding any provision of this code, each commissioner shall serve at the pleasure of the appoinƟng councilmember and may be removed by that councilmember at a regular city council meeƟng..
§ 5.16.060. Mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission—Powers and duƟes.

Within the limitaƟons provided by law, the, commission shall have the following powers and duƟes:

A. To receive, invesƟgate, hold hearings on, and pass upon all issues relaƟng to mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon, as set forth in this chapter;
B. To make or conduct such independent hearings or invesƟgaƟons as may be appropriate to obtain such informaƟon as is necessary to carry out its duƟes; C. To adjust space rents either upward or downward upon compleƟonprospecƟvely and, consistent with State Law, retroacƟvely for up to three years from the date of its hearings and invesƟgaƟonsthe submiƩal of an applicaƟon, consistent with the provisions of this Chapter; and
D. To adopt, promulgate, amend and rescind administraƟve rules to effectuategoverning the purposes and policiesconduct of commission hearings of this chapter, within the limitaƟons provided by law or by rules adopted by the city council.. § 5.16.060070. RegistraƟon. – Annual process administered by City Manager Office A. RegistraƟon Required. Within 60 calendar days aŌer the effecƟve date of the ordinance codified in this chapter and on or before every December 31 thereaŌer, park owners shall register all mobilehome park spaces with the city clerkmanager. No park owners shall be eligible to receive any rent increases as provided for in this chapter unless current registraƟon informaƟon is on file with the city clerkmanager.

B. IniƟal RegistraƟon. The iniƟal registraƟon under this SecƟon shall include the names, business addresses, and business telephone numbers of each person or legal enƟty possessing an ownership interest in the park and the nature of that interest, and all lienholders, (no later than 30 days aŌer acquiring such interest); the number of mobilehome spaces within the park; the name and address of each resident; a rent schedule reflecƟng space rents within the park on December 31, 1984, for all spaces not exempt from this chapter pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.030; a lisƟng of all other charges, including uƟliƟes, now included in space rent, paid by homeowners and the approximate amount of each such 48 charge; a list of all spaces exempt from this chapter pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.030 and the reason for the exempƟon and, for those exempt pursuant to leases or rental agreements, the date of the expiraƟon of the lease or rental agreement and the amount of the rent; and the name and address to which all required noƟces and correspondence may be sent.

C. DeterminaƟon of Rents. The city manager or his or her designee shall determine the base rent. The decision of the city staffmanager may be appealed to the commission. The decision of the city staffmanager, or the commission on appeal, shall be final. The city manager may promulgate regulaƟons necessary to effectuate the purpose of this secƟon.

D. Re-registraƟon.

1. The city manager or his or her designee may require re-registraƟon as deemed reasonable or necessary and may promulgate regulaƟons to effectuate the purpose of this secƟon.

2. The registraƟon requirements provided in this secƟon or which may be established by the city shall apply to all mobilehome parks and mobilehome park spaces, including those exempted from the provisions of this chapter by reason of the existence of a valid rental agreement.

E. The registraƟons required under this SecƟon shall be maintained by the city manager, and shall be subject to inspecƟon by the Commission and any homeowner upon request. § 5.16.070080. Subleasing in Mobilehome Parks.

A park owner may prohibit a homeowner from subleasing their mobilehome unless contrary to the MRL or other applicable law. A park owner may not retaliate against the homeowner for subleasing their mobilehome if the homeowner was permiƩed to do so.
§ 5.16.090. RegistraƟon and administraƟve fees.

A. Establishment of RegistraƟon Fee. At the Ɵme of iniƟal registraƟon or any subsequent registraƟon, park owners shall pay to the city such registraƟon fee for each mobilehome rental space within the park as may be established by resoluƟon of the city council (not to exceed the reasonable and necessary costs of administraƟon of this chapter). The city council may also provide that up to two- thirds of that fee may be passed through to homeowners as special and limited rent increases if apporƟoned equally among the spaces and charged in 12 equal consecuƟve installments.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this secƟon, where the total annual amount of the fee to be passed through to each homeowner is less than $48, the park owner may elect to recover the fee from the homeowners in one lump sum rather than in equal monthly installments.

B. Late Charge. If a park owner does not pay the fee provided for in subsecƟon A of this secƟon within the Ɵme period established by the city council, a late charge shall be assessed in an amount established by resoluƟon. No late charges may be passed through as special and limited rent increases to homeowners.
49 C. Unpaid Fee. No hearing or other proceedings shall be scheduled to take place, and no rent increase will be granted or will take effect for any mobilehome park for which there are unpaid registraƟon fees.

D. Purpose of the Fee. The registraƟon fee provided for by this secƟon is intended to defray the reasonable and necessary costs associated with the administraƟon of this chapter and the regulaƟons promulgated pursuant thereto.

E. Other AdministraƟve Fees. The city council may set by resoluƟon other administraƟve fees to cover the reasonable costs of processing various requests and appeals, as it deems necessary.
§ 5.16.080100. Rent increases—Commission approval.

On or aŌer March 28, 1991, no increase in space rents in excess of the amounts permiƩed pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.090120 (A) and (B)), which are implemented by the city manager, shall be effecƟve unless approved by the commission as set forth in this chapter. § 5.16.090110. Rent adjustments – ApplicaƟons.

The city manager shall be responsible for processing rent adjustment applicaƟons permiƩed under this chapter and for the development of any materials or regulaƟons necessary for its administraƟon. § 5.16.120. Rent increases—ComputaƟon and determinaƟon.

A. Formula Increases. Space rents may be increased automaƟcally and annually by no more than the total percentage change in the CPI for the applicable CPI adjustment period as determined by the city manager, except that space rent shall not be increased by more than five percent and may be increased by up to two percent. CalculaƟon of the one-year limitaƟon on formula increases shall be from the date the last formula increase became effecƟve for that parƟcular space. The city manager may promulgate regulaƟons to effectuate the purpose of this subsecƟon.

B. Vacancy Increases. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon A of this secƟon, upon vacancy, space rent may be increased up to fiŌeen percent of the then current maximum allowable rent permiƩed by this chapter prior to the vacancy. Upon applicaƟon, the city manager shall calculate and determine the correct amount of the vacancy increase and may promulgate regulaƟons to effectuate the purpose of this subsecƟon.

C. Special and Limited Rent and Rent Increases.

1. Government Required Services. The homeowner shall pay to the parkspark owner, on the herein described terms, no less than 60 days aŌer the park owner has noƟfied the homeowner in wriƟng, the increased costs to the park owner of government required services, which are to be included as part of the homeowner's rent but separately listed items on the monthly statement. a. For the purposes of this chapter, "government required services" shall be defined as services required by governmental agencies which are new or in addiƟon to those services legally required to be provided by the park owner to homeowners or to the mobilehome park on March 28, 1991.
b. Such services include fees and charges legally levied by an agency of federal, state or local government upon the park owner. Such services do not include 50 predictable expenses for operaƟon of the mobilehome park, such as commonarea uƟliƟes expenses or expenses which maintain the safe and healthful use of mobilehome park faciliƟes.
c. The park owner's actual out-of-pocket costs of providing government required services may be charged to the homeowner upon 60 days' wriƩen noƟce, using the following formula: Amount actually paid by the park owner, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park, divided by 12 months, equals the sum for government-required services to be charged to the homeowner.

Notwithstanding the formula described above, only those costs of providing governmental required services in the 12 months immediately preceding the proposed charge shall be reimbursed to the park owner by the homeowner in the manner herein described. The park owner shall charge the homeowner only those costs for government required services which are not reimbursed to the park owner by insurance or other sources.

2. Capital Improvements.
a. (i) Necessary infrastructure improvements subject only to the provisions of subsecƟon (C)(2)(d) of this secƟon; and (ii) subject to the vote requirements and the capital improvement limitaƟons set forth in SecƟon 5.16.020, and also subject to review by the commission pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.110150, the actual net costs of a capital improvement plus an interest charge to compensate the park owner for the use of money in making the improvement, as described below, may be charged to the homeowners upon 60 days' wriƩen noƟce, using the following formula: net amount actually paid by the park owner for the capital improvement, plus an interest charge as described below, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park affected by the improvement, divided by the amorƟzaƟon period for the capital improvement allowed by the Internal Revenue Service, equals the monthly sum for capital improvements to be charged to the homeowners and billed separately from space rent. b. The interest charge that may be added to the costs of materials and labor is the current rate derived from the then-current prime interest rate, computed on a declining balance over a five-year period with equal monthly payments (the fiveyear period represents the amount of Ɵme allowed for fully amorƟzing the cost of capital improvements).
c. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon (C)(2)(a) of this secƟon and SecƟon 5.16.100140, the city manager may approve special and limited rent increases for necessary infrastructure improvements upon a showing by the park owners that the proposed improvement meets the requirements of SecƟon

5.16.020 and that the park owner obtained a minimum of three bids from qualified persons/enƟƟes to perform the work, if possible, and that the park owner selected the person/enƟty submiƫng the lowest responsible bid to perform the work for the proposed necessary infrastructure improvement. No commission review is required or permiƩed.

D. 1. Sublease Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon A of this secƟon, upon sublease of a space and/or lease of a mobilehome, the space rent may be increased up to 51 15% of the rent otherwise permiƩed under this chapter. This rent surcharge shall be effecƟve only for the duraƟon of the sublease and shall be eliminated when and if the sublease is terminated. A sublease surcharge shall not become effecƟve unƟl 12 months aŌer the last vacancy increase pursuant to subsecƟon B of this secƟon. The sublease surcharge rent amount shall be calculated separately and shall not be included in the maximum allowable rent for the purposes of calculaƟng formula increases pursuant to subsecƟon A of this secƟon. The provisions of this subsecƟon shall not apply to those spaces granted hardship exempƟons pursuant to subsecƟon F of this secƟon for as long as the space is eligible for such exempƟon.

2. Absentee Owner Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon A of this secƟon, in the event that a homeowner does not use his or her mobilehome at a mobilehome park as a primary or principal residence and the homeowner is not otherwise subject to subsecƟon (D)(1) of this secƟon, the homeowner's space rent may be increased up to 15% of the rent otherwise permiƩed under this chapter. This rent increase shall be effecƟve only unƟl the homeowner occupies his or her mobilehome at the mobilehome park as a primary residence or the homeowner subleases his or her space or mobilehome and becomes subject to subsecƟon (D)(1) of this secƟon. For purposes of this chapter, a primary or principal residence is a residence where the homeowner resides for over 185 days during a calendar year.

E. Sublease Hardship ExempƟon. Upon applicaƟon, the city manager may grant a hardship exempƟon in connecƟon with the sublease surcharge, which exempƟon shall last for a term of one year. At the expiraƟon of any parƟcular term of the exempƟon, the applicant may apply to renew the one-year term by again establishing qualificaƟon for the exempƟon. The applicaƟon and renewal applicaƟon shall be in the forms provided by the city manager with a copy to the park owner and, shall include sufficient evidence to establish whether the applicant qualifies for an exempƟon pursuant to this secƟon and shall be signed by the applicant under penalty of perjury. The city manager shall grant the exempƟon for any qualified applicant.

1. QualificaƟon. To qualify for the sublease hardship exempƟon, the applicant must saƟsfy all of the following criteria:
a. The applicant must own a mobilehome at the applicable park, and must have occupied the mobilehome as his or her primary residence for a minimum of three years prior to applying for this exempƟon.
b. The applicant must present adequate evidence that he or she would qualify for the Low Income Rate Payer Assistance Program for Submetered Households. c. The combined value of assets owned by the applicant must not exceed $150,000 excluding the value of the mobilehome itself.
d. No person other than the applicant can declare the applicant as a dependent for purposes of federal or state taxes.
52 In the event that the applicant, aŌer receiving the hardship exempƟon, at any Ɵme ceases to saƟsfy all of the foregoing criteria, from that point on, the applicant will not be qualified to receive, and shall not receive, the hardship exempƟon.

2. Effect of ExempƟon. Each applicant who qualifies for the hardship exempƟon shall be exempt from the sublease surcharge provided in subsecƟon D of this secƟon. § 5.16.100130. Reserved.
§ 5.16.140. Rent adjustments—Commission review.

A. 1. In order to implement a rent increase as permiƩed under SecƟon 5.16.090 of this chapter (except rent increases under SecƟons 5.16.120(A), (B), or (C)(2)(c) that are administered by the city manager) or a rent decrease based on a reducƟon of housing services, the applicant must file with the commission a proposed rent schedule on the form provided by the commission. Any proposed capital improvement to be passed through to homeowners must be approved by the commission aŌer the park owner files an applicaƟon showing the amount of the expense, the amount to be passed through and proof of a majority vote in favor of the special and limited rent increases.

2. Where the park owner is the applicant, the park owner shall serve each affected homeowner, either personally or by cerƟfied mail, with wriƩen noƟce of the proposed increase, in accordance with state law, and with noƟce that a request for approval of same is being filed with the commission. Copies of the rent schedule, request for increase, and supporƟng documentaƟon shall be available to any homeowner requesƟng same at the park owner’s office in the affected mobilehome park. Where a homeowner (or homeowners, or organizaƟon of homeowners) is the applicant, the homeowner or organizaƟon of homeowners shall serve the affected park owner by mail or personally at the address and to the person designated in the registraƟon form submiƩed by the park owner to receive noƟces on behalf of the park owner. The applicant Applicants under this subsecƟon (A)(2) shall file proof of such service with the commission concurrent with the filing of the rent increase or decrease applicaƟon. Copies of the rent schedule, requesƩheir applicaƟons. The registraƟon informaƟon and address for increase and supporƟng documentaƟonservice shall be available to any homeowner requesƟng same at the park owner's office in the affected mobilehome parkapplicant or potenƟal applicant upon request.

B. If the city manager determines that the applicaƟon is not complete, accurate, or not in compliance with this chapter, within 21 days of the date on which the applicaƟon was filedsubmiƩed, the city manager shall give wriƩen noƟce of the deficiencies to the applicant.

In the event that the city manager or their designee determines that the applicaƟon is not complete or not in compliance with this chapter, the applicant may correct the idenƟfied deficiencies by amending the applicaƟon and/or contesƟng the determinaƟon to the Commission. Any amendment of an applicaƟon consistent with this paragraph must be served in the same manner as the applicaƟon as set forth in paragraph (A)(2) of this SecƟon.

No commissioner shall assist an applicant with compleƟng the applicaƟon form(s). A 53 determinaƟon of incompleteness by the city manager may be appealed to the Commission within 10 days of being rendered, and the decision of the Commission appealed to the City Council within 10 days of being rendered.

C. The city manager shall set a hearing on any requestapplicaƟon complying with the requirements of this chapter no sooner than 5030 days and no later than 70 days, and for an applicaƟon submiƩed under 5.16.230 no later than 90 days, aŌer the applicaƟon is accepted as complete. The city Within 10 days of receipt of a completed applicaƟon, the city manager shall send wriƩen noƟce to the applicant, who, if the park owner, who shall post such noƟce in a conspicuous place, reasonably selected to provide affected parƟes noƟce, of the Ɵme and place set for the hearing., and if a homeowner or organizaƟon of homeowners, to the person designated in the registraƟon form submiƩed by the park owner to receive noƟces on behalf of the park owner. If the commission approves an increase as requested, or lower than requested, the same shall take effect as noƟced by the park owner or as the commission may otherwise direct.

A. In the applicaƟon for rent adjustment under this chapter, the park owner shall indicate which, if any, of the mobilehome spaces are covered by leases or contracts which provide for more than a month-to-month tenancy, together with expiraƟon date of each such lease or contract. Any rent increase approved by the commission under this chapter shall not be applicable to spaces covered by such leases or contracts during the term of such leases or contracts.

D. Homeowner(s) in a mobilehome park may iniƟate commission review of a proposed land rent increase by filing with the city clerkmanager a wriƩen peƟƟon. The peƟƟon shall be in substanƟally such form and contain such informaƟon as may be required by the commissioncity manager.
§ 5.16.110150. Review hearings.

A. All review hearings conducted by the commission shall be open to the public.

B. All parƟes to the hearing may have assistance from an aƩorney or such other person as may be designated by the parƟes in presenƟng evidence or arguing their posiƟon. All witnesses shall be sworn in and all tesƟmony shall be under penalty of perjury.

C. In the event that either the affected park owner or the homeowner(s) should fail to appear at the hearing at the specified Ɵme and place, the commission: may hear and review such evidence as may be presented and make such decisions as if both parƟes had been present.

All review hearings shall be recorded. Recordings shall be preserved for six months, or longer if requested by any party affected by the hearing, or for the duraƟon of any pending liƟgaƟon or claim.

A. All review hearings shall be tape-recorded. Tapes shall be preserved for six months, or longer, if requested by either party affected by the hearing.

D. The commission may promulgate regulaƟons to effect the purpose of this secƟon and to assure fairensure hearings. are conducted fairly.
§ 5.16.120160. Rent adjustments—Commission decision authority. 54 A. The commission's decision shall be based on the preponderance of the evidence aƟn the record, including the hearing. All parƟes to the hearing shall be advised of the commission's decision and given a copy of the findings upon which the decision is basedwriƩen findings upon which the decision is based. When making a decision, the Commission shall consider reducƟons or increases to fees, assessments, and charges imposed by a government enƟty upon a space or by a state or locally mandated program relaƟng to housing contained in the Health and Safety Code.

B. Consistent with its findings, the commission may:

1. Permit thea requested increase to become effecƟve, in whole or in part;

2. Deny thea requested increase;

3. If circumstances jusƟfy, orderOrder a reducƟon in rent to a rate determined by the commission; and/or

4. Order that the park owner reimburse the applicant(s) the full amount, or any part of the amount, of the applicaƟon fee where: (a) the applicant(s) for a rent reducƟon was successful; (b) the park owner has not proven that the rent reducƟon ordered or the award of costs would deprive the park owner of a fair return as defined in this chapter; and (c) circumstances otherwise warrant the award of costs to the applicant.

C. If the commission finds that an increase that went into effect, or any porƟon thereof, that has been collected by a park owner is/was not jusƟfiedpermissible under this Chapter, the park owner shall refund or credit the overcharged amount found to be unjusƟfied to the homeowner within 60 days aŌer the date stated on the commission’s wriƩen decision. No refund or credit shall be ordered for any period more than 3 years before the date on which the homeowner filed an applicaƟon with the commission.

C.D.Any interested person may appeal a decision of the commission to the city council within 30 days aŌer the date stated on the wriƩen decision. of the commission is announced.is announced. The decision shall include the commission’s conclusions and findings of the commission. The city council shall review the commission’s decision de novo. The decision of the city council shall be final.

If the commission finds that a proposed increase, or any porƟon thereof that was previously inoperaƟve, is jusƟfied, the homeowner shall pay the amount found jusƟfied to the park owner within 60 days
D.E. Any party dispuƟng the final conclusions and findings of the commissioncity council may seek review of the commission'scity council’s acƟons pursuant to SecƟons 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

F. If the Commission finds that a park owner willfully charged homeowner(s) rent or other amount(s) greater than permiƩed by this Chapter, the Commission may order payment of up to treble the amount wrongfully charged or five-thousand dollars, whichever is greater. The amount of payment ordered shall be limited to amount wrongfully charged during the 3 years before the date on which the homeowner filed an applicaƟon with the commission.

G. If the Commission orders a return of rent, as described in subsecƟon (C) or (F), and the park owner fails to pay the amount ordered within 60 days of the Commission’s wriƩen decision, the homeowner(s) may withhold the amount ordered from their subsequent rent payment(s). If the park owner files an unlawful detainer acƟon against a homeowner for 55 withholding such rent payments, this subsecƟon shall serve as an affirmaƟve defense to evicƟon.
§ 5.16.130170. Hearing—Evidence and procedural irregulariƟes.

Formal rules of evidence or procedure which must be followed in court shall not apply to commissiondecision-making body proceedings, except to the extent that the commissiondecisionmaking body shall determine. No acƟon of the commissiondecision-making body hereunder shall be held void or invalid or be set aside by any court on the grounds of any improper admission or rejecƟon of evidence, or by reason of any error, irregularity, informality, neglect or omission (hereinaŌer called "error") as to any maƩer pertaining to applicaƟons, noƟces, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendaƟons, or any maƩers of procedure whatever, including but not limited to those included in this secƟon, unless aŌer an examinaƟon of the enƟre case, including the evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error complained of was prejudicial, and that by reason of such error the party complaining or appealing sustained and suffered substanƟal injury, and that a different result would have been probable if such error had not occurred or existed. There shall be no presumpƟon that error is prejudicial or that injury was done if error is shown.
§ 5.16.140180. ImplementaƟon guidelines.

AŌer a noƟced-public hearing, as it deems necessary, the city council may adopt by resoluƟon guidelines to aid in the implementaƟon of this chapter.
§ 5.16.150190. New and prospecƟve homeowners.

A. Prior to or at the Ɵme of agreeing to rent sparespace to a new homeowner in a mobilehome park, the park owner shall provide each new homeowner or prospecƟve homeowner with a noƟce and copy of the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon ordinance, as currently in force.

B. No park owner may require, directly or indirectly, that any resident or prospecƟve resident sign a lease or rental agreement that provides that it shall be exempt from local rent control or provides for space rent in excess of that permiƩed by this chapter as a condiƟon of tenancy in theand no park and no owner may deny a tenancy to a prospecƟve purchaser of a mobilehome in the park on the ground that the prospecƟve purchaser will not sign such a lease or rental agreement.

C. The noƟce in paragraph (A) shall contain a place for the homeowner to acknowledge receipt of the noƟce. The park owner shall sign an acknowledgment that the required noƟce has been given to the homeownerprovided and provide the homeowner with a copy of the executed acknowledgment. The park owner shall maintain a copy of the executed acknowledgment as long as the applicable tenancy conƟnues. § 5.16.160200. Homeowner's right of refusal.

A homeowner may refuse to pay any increase in rent or other charge which is in violaƟon of this chapter.

Such refusal to pay shall be a defense in any acƟon brought to recover possession of a mobilehome or mobilehome space or to collect the rent increase.
§ 5.16.170210. Retaliatory evicƟon.
56 Notwithstanding SecƟon 5.16.160200, in any acƟon brought to recover possession of a mobilehome space or mobilehome, the court shall consider as grounds for denial any violaƟon of any provision of this chapter. Further, the determinaƟon that the acƟon was brought in retaliaƟon for the exercise of any rights conferred by this chapter shall be grounds for denial. Any acƟon brought within one year of a peƟƟon or complaintan applicaƟon filed with the commission by the homeowner pursuant to this chapter shall be presumed to be retaliatory; this presumpƟon affects the burden of proof, and is rebuƩable by the park owner.
§ 5.16.180220. ViolaƟon—Civil remedies.

If any park owner demands, accepts, receives or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum lawful space rent, as determined under this chapter, then the homeowners in such mobilehome park affected by such violaƟon, individually or by class acƟon, may seek relief in a court of appropriate jurisdicƟon for injuncƟve relief and damages. TheA prevailing party willhomeowner shall be enƟtled to recover costs and reasonable aƩorneys' fees as part of any court judgment. A prevailing park owner shall not recover any costs, unless the court finds the homeowner’s acƟon or defense to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundaƟon.
§ 5.16.190230. ViolaƟon—Penalty.
(A) Criminal penalty. Any person violaƟng any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment for a period of not more than six months, or by both. Each violaƟon of any provision of this chapter, and each day during which any such violaƟon is commiƩed, permiƩed or conƟnued, shall consƟtute a separate offense.
(B) Civil penalty. Any person violaƟng any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement, of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $100 per violaƟon, or $200 per willful violaƟon. Any aggrieved person may file a civil acƟon on behalf of the City of Malibu and other aggrieved persons in a court of competent jurisdicƟon to recover the civil penalty established by this paragraph, in which case any civil penalƟes recovered shall be distributed as follows: ten percent to the aggrieved person(s) who filed the acƟon; twenty-five percent to the other aggrieved persons; and sixty-five percent to the City of Malibu for the purpose of enforcing this Chapter and educaƟng the public concerning this Chapter. § 5.16.200240. Just and reasonable return.

A park owner may file a rent adjustment applicaƟon for one, some or all the spaces in a mobilehome park in order to establish the maximum allowable rent or to achieve a fair and reasonable return.

Homeowners may file a rent adjustment applicaƟon based on reducƟon in services or other grounds established by this-chapter or regulaƟons promulgated pursuant thereto. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the grant of a rent adjustment upon applicaƟon by a park owner when required by law to permit a fair and reasonable return to the park owner. The city shall receive relevant evidence, in accordance with applicable regulaƟons, demonstraƟng that a landlordpark owner or sublessor is not receiving a fair and reasonable return in determining these applicaƟons. City council regulaƟons shall establish a formula to calculate whether an applicant is enƟtled to a rent increase to obtain a fair and reasonable return.
57 § 5.16.210250. Mobilehome park relocaƟonconversion impact reports.

A. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this secƟon is to implement the provisions of state law addressing the adverse impacts on the residents and homeowners in a park which is converted, closed or where the park's use is changed or ceased.

B. DefiniƟons. For purposes of this secƟon, the following definiƟons shall apply in addiƟon to those listed in SecƟon 5.16.020.
"Advisory agency" means the planning department, commission, or hearing officer asother authority designated by the city council.City Council.
"Change of use”" means a use of a mobilehome park for a purpose other than the rental, or the holding out for rent, of two or more mobilehome sites to accommodate mobilehomes for human habitaƟon.
"Change of use" includes, but is not limited to, a change of the park or any porƟon thereof to a condominium, stock cooperaƟve, or any form of ownership wherein spaces within the park are to be sold, and the cessaƟon of use of all or a porƟon of the park, whether immediately or on a gradual basis, or the closure of the park. "Change of use" shall not include mere purchase of the park by its exisƟng homeowners. "Comparable housing" means housing which is comparable in floor space area, deck and lot size, and number of bedrooms and other relevant factors to the mobilehome to which comparison is being made, which housing meets the minimum standards of the State Uniform Housing Code.
"Comparable mobilehome park" means any other mobilehome park substanƟally equivalent in terms of park condiƟon, ameniƟes, ocean views and beach access and other relevant factors.
"Date of applicaƟon for change of use" means the date of filing of an applicaƟon for rezoning, general plan amendment, use permit, site development permit or other discreƟonary development approval under this code, which applicaƟon seeks approval of a change of use of a mobilehome park or the date of the, its closure, or cessaƟon of use. "Eligible homeowner" means a homeowner whose mobilehome or manufactured home was located in a mobilehome park on the date of the applicaƟon for a change of use.

C. C. General Requirements.

1. Any person who files an applicaƟon for a rezoning, general plan amendment, subdivision map, use permit, site development permit or for any other discreƟonary development approval, for the purpose of a change of use of a mobilehome park or, closure, or cessaƟon of use, shall file with the advisory agency a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessaƟon of use (hereinaŌer "closure") upon the residents of the mobilehome park who will be displaced, no later than the filing of the first such applicaƟon necessary to authorize such closure.

2. No applicaƟon shall be considered or deemed completed or processed for consideraƟon and approval unless and unƟl such conversion impact report shall have been filed as required by this subsecƟon.SecƟon.

3. Use of a property as mobilehome park shall not be terminated for the purpose of conversion to another land use or cessaƟon of use unƟl approval by the advisory agency and the city council, or appeal, has been received.
58 4. No building permit shall be issued on property occupied by a mobilehome park at the effecƟve date of this chapter or hereinaŌeraŌer for uses other than those associated with the mobile home park use and allowed under the special use permit, unƟl approval under this secƟon has been received.

5. D. The park owner shall give any wriƩen noƟce to homeowners required by state law.

D. Conversion Impact Report.

1. The conversion impact report shall addressinclude a replacement and relocaƟon plan that addresses the availability of adequate replacement housing in mobilehome parks and the cost of relocaƟng displaced residents.

2. In order to evaluate adequately and address those issues, the conversion impact report shall contain the following informaƟon:
a. At the applicant’s expense and if there are displaced residents, an appraisal of the onsite value, depreciated replacement value, and removal value of the mobilehome of each eligible resident in the park. The appraisal must be prepared by a State-cerƟfied appraiser, approved by the City, with experience establishing the value of mobilehomes, and shall be based upon the current in-place value of the mobilehome and shall assume the conƟnuaƟon of the mobilehome park.
b. The names, addresses and mobilehome site idenƟficaƟon numbers of all persons owning mobilehomes within the mobilehome park and of all mobilehome residents on the date of applicaƟon for change of use;
c. The age, including date of manufacture, of each mobilehome within such park, including the type of mobilehome, width characterisƟcs, size, and number idenƟfying the mobilehome site being occupied;
d. A list of vacant mobilehome sites in comparable mobilehome parks within a 50 mile radius of the park which is the subject of the applicaƟon or request; e. The list shall contain a schedule of site rental rates for each park listed and the criteria of the management of each park for acceptance of new homeowners and used mobilehomes;
f. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of one or more housing specialists from the list compiled by the advisory agency, and the names, addresses and telephone numbers and fee schedules of persons qualified as mobilehome movers and of persons who are qualified appraisers of mobilehomes and an explanaƟon of the services the housing specialists will provide;
g. The applicant may designate other housing specialists, and mobilehome movers and appraisers; provided, that use of any such persons pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to approval by the advisory agency;
h. A relocaƟon plan which will include:
i. Timetable for implemenƟng the physical relocaƟon of mobilehomes, ii. ImplementaƟon of relocaƟon assistance,
iii. Payment of relocaƟon costs, and
iv. ConversionThe requested “change of use”; conversion of the park to one or more other uses.; cessaƟon of use, or closure of the park.

3. The applicaƟon for change of use shall include within the conversion impact reportreplacement and relocaƟon plan the steps proposed to miƟgate any adverse impact on 59 the ability of displaced homeowners to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park, including the reasonable costs of relocaƟon.
a. All eligible homeowners and all mobilehome tenants of eligible homeowners shall be provided with the services of one or more housing experts to assist them in relocaƟng to available and adequate housing upon their request. Any such experts shall be those approved pursuant to this secƟon.

E. Advisory Agency DeterminaƟon

1. Before approving a change of use, the advisory agency shall:
a. Review the conversion impact report and any relevant documentaƟon. b. Make a finding as to whether or not approval of the park closure and the park’s conversion into its intended new use, taking into consideraƟon both the impact report as a whole and the overall housing availability within the local jurisdicƟon, will result in or materially contribute to a shortage of housing opportuniƟes and choices for low- and moderate-income households within the local jurisdicƟon.

2. Factors to Consider.
a. A factor to be considered is that the conversion will not result in the displacement of low-income individuals or households who cannot afford rents charged in other parks. b. A factor to be considered is iƟf the conversion is to another residenƟal use, the homeowners have first opportunity to occupy and the construcƟon schedule will not result in long-term displacement.

No benefits shall be provided to any person who is renƟng a mobilehome from the owner

3. An eligible homeowner or tenant of the mobilehome park where such person shall have executedan eligible homeowner may enter a wriƩen agreement with such mobilehome the park owner to waive his or her right to benefits specified under statute provided that the park owner waiving his or her rights to any suchgives other benefits. No comparable to those mandated by statute. To be valid, such waiver shall he valid unless it containscontain the text of this secƟon, and unless such person shall have executed ainclude a signed wriƩen acknowledgmentacknowledgement that hethe person waiving his or sheher rights has read and understands his or her rights pursuant to this chapter and knowingly agrees to waive them.

4. In order to facilitate the intenƟons of the homeowners or tenants and an applicant for a change of use with regard to a change of use, cessaƟon of use, or closure, the parƟes may agree to mutually saƟsfactory relocaƟon assistance. To hebe valid such an agreement shall be in wriƟng, shall include a provision staƟng that the homeowner or tenant is aware of the provisions of this chapter, shall include a copy of this chapter as an aƩachment, shall include a provision in at least 10 point type which clearly states the right to seek and the importance of obtaining an aƩorney's advice prior to signing the agreement, and shall be draŌed in form and content otherwise required by applicable state law. Any person signing such an agreement may rescind it in wriƟng within 10 business days of final approval of change of use. Any such agreement which 60 is procured by fraud, misrepresentaƟon, coercion or duress of any kind shall be void and unenforceable.

F. Hearing and NoƟce.

1. Upon the receipt of an impact report, within 30 days the advisory agency shall examine the same and advise the applicant whether it is complete. When a complete impact report has been filed and accepted by the advisory agency, within 3090 days the advisory agency shall set a Ɵme, place and date for a public hearing.

2. At least 3075 days prior to the public hearing, the advisory agency shall mail noƟce to the applicant and the homeowners of the date, Ɵme and place of the meeƟng.

3. At least 1560 days prior to the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency on the applicaƟon for change of use and conversion impact report, the applicant shall provide the homeowner and all other persons described with a copy of this chapter, a copy of the conversion impact report, and date and Ɵme for an informaƟonal meeƟng pursuant to subsecƟon (E)(4) of this secƟon.

4. At least 30 days prior to the public hearing, the advisory agency shall provide noƟce to the applicant that:
a. NoƟfies the applicant of the provisions of Civil Code SecƟon 798.56 and any local requirements which impose a duty to noƟfy homeowners and subtenants of the proposed change in use; and
b. Specifies the manner in which the applicant must verify that homeowners and subtenants have been noƟfied of the proposed change of use. Neither a hearing on the applicaƟon, nor any other acƟon thereon, shall be taken by the advisory agency before the applicant has saƟsfactorily verified that the homeowners and subtenants have been so noƟfied, in the manner prescribed by law or local regulaƟon.

5. Not less than 10 days prior to the date of the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency, the applicant shall conduct an informaƟonal meeƟng for the residents of the mobilehome park regarding the status of the applicaƟon, the Ɵming of proposed relocaƟon of residents, proposed relocaƟon costs and assistance, and the contents of the conversion impact report. The meeƟng shall be conducted on the premises of the mobilehome park. The housing specialist(s) designated in the impact report shall be present at such meeƟng.

6. Within five days prior to the public hearing, the applicant shall file with the advisory agency a statement made under penalty of perjury that all requirements pursuant to subsecƟons (E)(3) and (4) of this secƟon have been complied with and include date, Ɵme, and place where such meeƟng as required by subsecƟon (E)(4) of this secƟon occurred.

G. Findings and Decision. At the conclusion of the hearing, the advisory agency shall render its decision. The advisory agency shall approve, condiƟonally approve or disapprove the relocaƟon impact report. The advisory agency shall approve the relocaƟon impact report if it finds that the relocaƟon impact report contains the informaƟon required pursuant to this secƟon. In approving the relocaƟon impact report, the advisory agency may impose such condiƟons as it finds 61 necessary to miƟgate the adverse impacts on the residents; however, any steps required to be taken by the park owner pursuant to this secƟon shall not exceed the reasonable costs of relocaƟon. NoƟce of the advisory agency acƟon shall be mailed to the park owner, to all homeowners, to all Subtenants, to all Sublessors, and to all persons who have filed wriƩen request therefor.

H. Request for Appeal. The park owner or, any homeowner, any Subtenant, or any Sublessor may appeal the advisory agency's decision to the city council. The appeal shall be filed with the city on a form provided for that purpose within 10 days aŌer the acƟon of the advisory agency.

When an appeal is filed, it shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount determined according to SecƟon 5.16.070. The city shall, within 45 days, set a Ɵme and date for a hearing, and shall mail wriƩen noƟce of such hearing to the park owner, all homeowners, all Subtenants, all Sublessors, the person requesƟng the hearing, the advisory agency and all persons who have filed wriƩen request therefor, at least 15 days prior to the hearing.

For all requests for hearing, the city council may sustain, modify, reject or overrule any recommendaƟons or rulings of the advisory agency and may make such findings as are not inconsistent with the provisions of this secƟon.

I. Extensions. Any of the Ɵme limits specified in this secƟon may be extended by mutual consent of park owner and the advisory agency, or the city council, on appeal, with noƟce to affected homeownersparƟes, except where prohibited by state law.

J. ExpiraƟon and Extension of RelocaƟonConversion Impact Report. The approval of a relocaƟonconversion impact report shall become null and void aŌer 36 months from the date of the mailing of the final approval of the relocaƟonconversion impact report. ThereaŌer, the park owner shall not convert, close or cease the use of the park unƟl such Ɵme as a new relocaƟonconversion impact report is approved. However, upon applicaƟon of the park owner, filed with the advisory agency on or before the date of expiraƟon, the relocaƟonconversion impact report may be extended by the advisory agency up to an addiƟonal 36 months. An applicaƟon for an extension shall be subject to the noƟce and hearing procedures of this secƟon.

K. CondiƟons. In the approval of a mobilehome park conversion, the city may aƩach condiƟons deemed reasonable in order to miƟgate the impacts associated with the conversion. Such condiƟons shall not be limited to, but may include, the following:

1. If the land occupied by the park is to be sold, the homeowners shall be given the right of first negoƟaƟon (from the seller) and matching rights (right of last refusal) for the purchase of the park and all the improvements.

2. The homeowners be given the opƟon of a long-term lease of the land and purchase of the improvements.

3. The city may aƩach an effecƟve date upon their approval of the conversion. This date will provide sufficient Ɵme for the relocaƟon of the mobilehome to other parks.

L. RevocaƟon and Amendment. Any Ɵme prior to the change of use, cessaƟon of use, or closure of the mobilehome park, the advisory agency may, in its discreƟon, and upon good cause shown, 62 iniƟate proceedings for the revocaƟon or amendment of an impact report.the approval of the applicaƟon for change of use. Good cause may include, but is not limited to, change of circumstances which render the condiƟons or requirements of the relocaƟonconversion impact report no longer necessary or appropriate, negligent or fraudulent misrepresentaƟon of fact relaƟng to the relocaƟonconversion impact report, or noncompliance with the condiƟons of the conversion impact report. Prior to revoking or amending a relocaƟon impact reporƩhe approval of the applicaƟon, the advisory agency shall conduct a hearing in accordance with the applicable procedures set forth in subsecƟon EF of this secƟon. Upon revocaƟon, the park owner shall not convert, close, cease or change the use of the park unƟl such Ɵme as a new relocaƟonconversion impact report is approved or other requirement under this Chapter is saƟsfied. Such revocaƟon or amendment is subject to the same request for hearing as is provided in subsecƟon GH of this secƟon.

M. EvicƟons Pending Compliance with RelocaƟonConversion Impact Report. TerminaƟon of a tenancy of any residenthomeowner or subtenant pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon 798.56 or any other provision of law shall not relieve the park owner of its obligaƟon to comply with the condiƟons or requirements of the relocaƟon impact report applicable to that resident. However, if the terminaƟon of tenancy is based on subdivisions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) of SecƟon 798.56 of the Civil Code, the advisory agency, upon request by the park owner, may grant to the park owner extensions of Ɵme within which to comply with the condiƟons of the relocaƟon impact report.conversion impact report applicable to that homeowner or subtenant.

N. AddiƟonal Authority of the Advisory Agency. If, notwithstanding the fact that the park owner has not served a six months' or 12 months'the applicable noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy on the residentshomeowners, the advisory agency finds that the park owner is aƩempƟng to close or convert a park, then the advisory agency shall require the filing of a relocaƟonconversion impact report.

O. ObligaƟons of Applicant AŌer Approval of the ApplicaƟon for Change of Use and Conversion Impact Report. AŌer the date of the final determinaƟon thatapproving the conversion impact report complies with the requirements of this chapterand change of use applicaƟon, the applicant shall undertake or be responsible for performance of the following obligaƟons:

1. Not later than 30 days from the date of such determinaƟon, the housing specialist or specialists shall make personal contact with each homeowner and Subtenant of the mobilehome park and commence consultaƟons to determine the applicable costs and assistance to be provided. The housing specialist or specialists shall give each homeowner, Subtenant and former resident eligible to receive relocaƟon assistance wriƩen noƟce of his or her rights to relocaƟon assistance as determined by the city under this chapter.

2. Not less than 120 days prior to the date any homeowner is required to vacate the mobilehome park, any cash or monetary relocaƟon costs required by this chapter shall be paid to such homeowner, to such Subtenant, to any former resident eligible for such costs, or to any person, firm or corporaƟon performing relocaƟon related services for the homeowner or Subtenant, as the homeowner or Subtenant may direct. If the applicant purchases the mobilehome the homeowner shall be required to promptly submit to the applicant all 63 documents necessary to transfer complete Ɵtle and ownership of such mobilehome to the applicant, free and clear of all security interest, liens, or other encumbrances.

3. The date upon which any resident of the mobilehome park is required to vacate such park, or upon which any mobilehome is required to be removed from the mobilehome park, shall be not less than six12 months from the date of noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon 798.56(f)).a)(7)(B)(i). The applicant shall provide homeowners with a copy of the final impact report at the same Ɵme the 12-months’ noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy is provided.

4. If the owner of the mobilehome park, the applicant homeowner or tenant specifically requests that any of the Ɵme limitaƟons required by this secƟon, except those provided by State law, be modified, the cityadvisory agency, or City Council on appeal, shall consider any such modificaƟon and evidence relaƟng to the need therefor at the public hearing on the change of use applicaƟon and conversion impact report. The cityadvisory agency, or City Council on appeal, shall have the power to make modificaƟon in such Ɵme limits, both in response to a request and on its own moƟon, in conjuncƟon with any approval of aan applicaƟon and conversion impact report, as the cityit may deem just and reasonable.

P. Payment of RelocaƟon Assistance Benefits—Prerequisite to Issuance of Building Permit to Redevelop Park. No building permit shall be issued for the development of any real property which has been or is being converted from a mobilehome park pursuant to this chapter unless and unƟl the applicant or the owner of the property, as the case may be, who is responsible for payment of any required monetary relocaƟon assistance, shall have filed with the advisory agency a verified statement made under penalty of perjury that relocaƟon assistance payments required pursuant to this chapter have been paid. Such statement shall specify in itemized form each payee, the amount paid, the date of payment, and the type of relocaƟon or other assistance for which each such payment was made.

Q. ViolaƟons. ViolaƟons of this secƟon shall consƟtute a misdemeanor. In addiƟon, any park owner or applicantsublessor who violates any rights of any homeowner or mobilehome tenantsubtenant established under this chaptersecƟon shall be liable to the person for actual damages caused by such violaƟon, plus costs and reasonable aƩorneys' fees. No park owner shall take any wilfulwillful acƟon to threaten, retaliate against or harass any park residenthomeowner with the intent to prevent such residentshomeowner from exercising his or hertheir rights under this chapter.secƟon.
64 § 5.16.010. Purpose of provisions.

D. For these reasons, among others, the city council finds and declares it necessary to protect the owners and occupiers of mobilehomes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same Ɵme recognizing the need of park owners to receive a fair return on their property. In addiƟon, the city council finds that it is necessary to provide for the preparaƟon and approval of reports evaluaƟng the impact of changes of use of the parks and provide for measures to miƟgate the impact on residents of these changes of use. (Prior code § 6700; Ord. 48U § 1, 1991) § 5.16.020. DefiniƟons.
"Allowable legal expenses" means aƩorney's fees and costs incurred in connecƟon with successful goodfaith aƩempts to recover rents owing, and successful good-faith unlawful detainer acƟons not in derogaƟon of applicable law, to the extent same are not recovered from homeowners. AƩorney's fees and costs incurred in proceedings before the commission, or in connecƟon with civil acƟons against the commission, are not allow-able as operaƟng expenses.

Attachment 3
65 "Base rent" means the space rent charged on March 28, 1991. : (1) for spaces not subject to a long term lease that complies with the provisions of Civil Code SecƟon 798.17, the space rent charged on March 28, 1991; and (2) for spaces subject to valid long term leases on March 28, 1991, which leases comply with the provisions of Civil Code SecƟon 798.17, the last space rent charged under the long term lease. "Capital improvements" means the park owner's cost of construcƟng new improvements or replacing old improvements in the mobilehome park, subject to the following limitaƟons:

2. Normal rouƟne maintenance and repair are not capital improvements.

3. Insured repairs and replacement are not capital improvements.

4. The improvements must be permanently fixed in place or relaƟvely immobile.

5. Those improvements that the park owner intends to pass through to the homeowner through special and limited rent increases, except for necessary infrastructure improvements, must be approved by 50% plus one of the homeowners.
"Capital improvements" include construcƟon, installaƟon or replacement of all or a porƟon of a clubhouse, laundry facility or other common area faciliƟes a swimming pool, sauna, hot tub or other recreaƟonal ameniƟes, streets, security gates, outdoor or common area lighƟng, retaining walls, sewer, electrical, plumbing, water or television recepƟon systems, sprinkler systems, or any addiƟon to or upgrade of exisƟng improvements.
"Commission" means the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission, as established by this chapter. "CPI" means the average of the Consumer Price Index (All Items) prepared by the Bureau of Labor StaƟsƟcs for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim- and Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario areas relaƟng to all urban consumers. If the method of calculaƟng the CPI is substanƟally revised aŌer the adopƟon of the ordinance codified in this chapter, the method in effect upon adopƟon of such ordinance shall conƟnue to be used, or the revised CPI shall be adjusted by the city to correspond to that method.

CPI Adjustment Period. In December of each year, Tthe city shall calculate and furnish a figure consƟtuƟng the CPI change for use as the basis of rent increases. Such figure need only be based upon available data. This figure shall be based on the changes in the CPI during the last available 12-month period (from November to November) for which informaƟon is available from the Bureau of Labor StaƟsƟcs prior to the effecƟve date of the base rent or current space rent. "Gross income" means and includes the following:

1. Gross rent, computed as gross rental income at 100% paid occupancy; plus

3. Income from laundry faciliƟes, cleaning fees or services, garage and parking fees aƩributable to mobilehome spaces; plus

4. All other income or consideraƟon received or receivable for, or in connecƟon with the housing services; minus
66 5. Uncollected rents due to vacancy and bad debts, to the extent that the same are beyond the owner's control. Uncollected rents in excess of three percent of gross rents shall be presumed to be unreasonable, unless proven otherwise. Where uncollected rent must be proven, the average of the preceding three years' experience shall be used, or other comparable method.
"Homeowner" means any person enƟtled to occupy a mobilehome which is located within a mobilehome park in the city.
"Housing services" means services provided by the park owner related to the use or occupancy of a mobilehome space, including, but not limited to, water and sewer, natural gas, electricity, refuse removal, management and administraƟon (including employee salaries and fringe benefits), maintenance and repairs, supplies, adverƟsing, recreaƟon faciliƟes, laundry faciliƟes, parking, security services, insurance, property taxes, governmental assessments, and other costs reasonably aƩributable to the operaƟon of the mobilehome park. The term "housing services" shall not include legal fees or mortgage payments, whether for principal, interest, or both. "Mobilehome" has the same definiƟon given in the Mobilehome Residency Law, specifically Civil Code SecƟon 798.3, and includesmeans a structure designated or designed for human habitaƟon, transported and for being moved on a street or highway over the high-ways to a-permanent occupancy site, and installed on the site either with or-without a permanent foundaƟon. "Mobile-home" includes a manufactured home, as defined in the Health and Safety Code, but does not include either a recreaƟonal vehicle, or a commercial coach, or factory built housing as they are defined in the Health and Safety Code.
"Mobilehome park" means an area of land where two or more mobilehome spaces are rented, or leased held out for rent, to accommodate for mobilehomes used as residencesfor human habitaƟon. "Mobilehome park" does not include developments which sell lots for mobilehomes or which provide condominium ownership of such lots, even if one or more homes in the development are rented or leased out.
"Mobilehome park owner" or "park owner" means the owner, lessor, operator or manager of a mobilehome park in the city.
"Necessary infrastructure improvements" means maintenance (such as replacement of a necessary component of a system or improvement, and other than normal maintenance or repair which consƟtute "operaƟng expenses" pursuant to this secƟon of streets, electrical, gas, plumbing, sewer or water systems, except that costs of replacement or repair incurred or required as a result of the park owners negligence.
"OperaƟng expenses" shall include the following:

1. Real property taxes;

2. UƟlity costs;

3. Management expenses (contracted or park owner-performed), including necessary and reasonable adverƟsing, accounƟng, insurance, and other managerial expenses, and allowable legal expenses. Management expenses are presumed to be five percent of gross income, unless established otherwise;
67 4. Normal repair and maintenance expenses, including painƟng, normal cleaning, fumigaƟon, landscaping, and repair of all standard services, including electrical, plumbing, carpentry, furnished appliances, drapes, carpets and furniture;

6. License and registraƟon fees required by law, to the extent same are not otherwise paid by homeowners;

1. Avoidable and unnecessary expenses since the base year, including refinancing costs;

2. Mortgage principal and interest payments;

3. Any penalty, fees or interest assessed or awarded for violaƟon of this or any other law;

4. Legal fees, except allowable legal expenses as defined in this secƟon;

5. DepreciaƟon of the property;

6. Any expense for which the park owner has been reimbursed by any security deposit, insurance seƩlement, judgment for damages, seƩlement or any other method;

7. Land lease payments;

8. Cost of replacement or repair incurred or necessary as a result of the park owner's negligence or failure to maintain;

8.9.Property tax increases arising from, or aƩributable to, any transfer of the property.. “Rent” means all space rents and consideraƟon for the use or occupancy of a mobilehome. "Space rent" means the consideraƟon on a monthly basis, including any bonuses, benefits or gratuiƟes, demanded or received in connecƟon with the use and occupancy of a mobilehome space in a mobilehome park, or for housing services provided, but exclusive of:

1. Any amount paid for the use of a mobilehome;

2. Security deposits and special and limited rent increases;

3. User fees for services or faciliƟes which may be uƟlized at the opƟon of the homeowners and are not included in monthly space rent; and

4. UƟlity charges for those mobilehome parks which bill homeowners separately whether or not the mobilehomes are individually metered.
"Sublessor" means any person or enƟty that rents a mobilehome, sited in a mobilehome park, to another person or enƟty.
"Subtenant" means any person or enƟty that rents a mobiliehome, sited in a mobilehome park, from another person or enƟty.
§ 5.16.030. ExempƟons.
68 The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to the following tenancies in mobilehome parks located in the city, except that all tenancies in mobilehome parks shall be subject to the registraƟon provisions of SecƟons 5.16.060 and 5.16.070:

A. Mobilehome park spaces rented for nonresidenƟal uses; B.A. Mobilehome parks managed or operated by the United States Government, the state of California, the county of Los Angeles or the cCity of Malibu; C. Tenancies which do not exceed an occupancy of 20 days and which do not contemplate an occupancy of more than 20 days;
D.B. Tenancies for which any federal or state law or regulaƟon specifically prohibits rent regulaƟons, to the extent such federal or state law preempts this Chapterof such prohibiƟon; E. Tenancies subject to rental agreements exempt from local ordinances pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon 798.17; and
F. Tenancies covered by leases or rental agreements exisƟng at the effecƟve date of the ordinance codified in this chapter which are not exempt pursuant to subsecƟon E of this secƟon, but only for the duraƟon of such leases or rental agreements. Upon the expiraƟon or other terminaƟon of such lease or rental agreement, this chapter shall immediately be applicable to the tenancy, unless that lease or rental agreement immediately succeeded by a lease or rental agreement referred to in subsecƟon E of this secƟon. § 5.16.040. Mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission—Establishment and organizaƟon.

A. There is established a commission to be known as the "Malibu Mobilehome Park Rent StabilizaƟon Commission." The commission shall be comprised of five residents of the city. Each member of the city council shall appoint one member of the commission to serve at the pleasure of the appoinƟng councilmember. Appointments shall be made at a regular city council meeƟng following a general municipal elecƟon. Vacancies on the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission shall be filled by appointment at a regular city council meeƟng by the individual councilmember who made the appointment to the seat which is vacant. A member of the commission shall be appointed to a vacant posiƟon by four-fiŌhs vote of the city council and serve at the pleasure of the city council. In no event shall any member of the commission be or, at any Ɵme during the immediately previous fiveone years have been, a park owner, or homeowner, or employee, officer, director or owner, directly or indirectly, of at least five-percent of a park owner.

B. The city manager shall provide all administraƟve staff necessary to serve the commission. The city clerk shall serve as secretary of the commission and shall be responsible for the maintenance of all records of the commission. The secretary shall keep a record of its proceedings, which shall be open for inspecƟon by any member of the public. The city aƩorney or the designee of the city aƩorney shall act as legal counsel to the commission. § 5.16.050. Mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon commission—Powers and duƟes.

Within the limitaƟons provided by law, the, commission shall have the following powers and duƟes:

A. To receive, invesƟgate, hold hearings on, and pass upon all issues relaƟng to mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon, as set forth in this chapter;
69 B. To make or conduct such independent hearings or invesƟgaƟons as may be appropriate to obtain such informaƟon as is necessary to carry out its duƟes; C. To adjust space rents and/or rents either upward or downward, both prospecƟvely and retrospecƟvely, including through an award, orf the return, of any collected rent or space rent contrary to this Chapter, upon compleƟon of its hearings and invesƟgaƟons; and D. To adopt, promulgate, amend and rescind administraƟve rules to effectuate the purposes and policies of this chapter, within the limitaƟons provided by law or by rules adopted by the city council.
§ 5.16.060. RegistraƟon.

A. RegistraƟon Required. Within 60 calendar days aŌer the effecƟve date of the ordinance codified in this chapter and on or before every December 31 thereaŌer, park owners shall register all mobilehome park spaces with the city clerk. No park owners shall be eligible to receive any rent increases as provided for in this chapter unless current registraƟon informaƟon is on file with the city clerk.

B. IniƟal RegistraƟon. The iniƟal registraƟon under this SecƟon shall include the names, business addresses, and business telephone numbers of each person or legal enƟty possessing an ownership interest in the park and the nature of that interest, and all lienholders, (no later than 30 days aŌer acquiring such interest); the number of mobilehome spaces within the park; the name and address of each resident; a rent schedule reflecƟng space rents within the park on December 31, 1984, for all spaces not exempt from this chapter pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.030; a lisƟng of all other charges, including uƟliƟes, now included in space rent, paid by homeowners and the approximate amount of each such charge; a list of all spaces exempt from this chapter pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.030 and the reason for the exempƟon and, for those exempt pursuant to leases or rental agreements, the date of the expiraƟon of the lease or rental agreement and the amount of the rent; and the name and address to which all required noƟces and correspondence may be sent.

C. DeterminaƟon of Rents. The city manager or his or her designee shall determine the base rent. The decision of the city staffmanager may be appealed to the cCommission. The decision of the city staffmanager, or the commission on appeal, shall be final. The city manager or the Commission may promulgate regulaƟons necessary to effectuate the purpose of this secƟon – the city manager with respect to the processing of such registraƟons, and the commission with respect to review and/or consideraƟon of such registraƟons. In the event any regulaƟons promulgated by the city manager under this SecƟon are inconsistent with those promulgated by the Commission, the regulaƟons promulgated by the Commission shall control.

D. Re-registraƟon.

1. The city manager or his or her designee, or the Commission, may require reregistraƟon as deemed reasonable or necessary and may promulgate regulaƟons to effectuate the purpose of this secƟon – the city manager with respect to the processing of such re-registraƟons, and the commission with respect to review and/or consideraƟon of such re-registraƟons.

2. The registraƟon requirements provided in this secƟon or which may be established by the city shall apply to all mobilehome parks and mobilehome park spaces, 70 including those exempted from the provisions of this chapter by reason of the existence of a valid rental agreement.

A. RegistraƟon Required. Within 15 days of a Sublessor leasing a mobilehome to a Subtenant, or within 60 calendar days aŌer the effecƟve date of this SecƟon, whichever is later, each Sublessor shall register each leased mobilehome with the city clerk. No Sublessor shall be eligible to receive any compensaƟon for the lease of a mobilehome unless the Sublessor complies with this SecƟon and, upon applicaƟon by the Subtenant, the. Commission may order the Sublessor to refund such compensaƟon to the Subtenant.

B. InformaƟon Required in RegistraƟon. The registraƟon under this SecƟon shall include the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of each person or legal enƟty possessing an ownership interest in the mobilehome and the nature of that interest; the address of the mobilehome; the name of each resident of the mobilehome; the rent charged to the Subtenant for use of the space and mobilehome; a lisƟng of all other charges, including uƟliƟes paid by the Subtenant and the approximate amount of each such charge; and the name and address to which all noƟces and correspondence may be sent to the Sublessor.

C. The city manager or their designee may publish a form for distribuƟon to Sublessors for accomplishing the registraƟon required by this SecƟon. RegistraƟon by a Sublessor is required any Ɵme the informaƟon set forth in paragraph B of this SecƟon has changed, within 30 days of such change.

D. The registraƟons required under this SecƟon shall be maintained by the city manager, and shall be subject to inspecƟon by the Commission and any Subtenant upon request. § 5.16.070. RegistraƟon and administraƟve fees.

A. Establishment of RegistraƟon Fee. At the Ɵme of iniƟal registraƟon or any subsequent registraƟon, park owners shall pay to the city such registraƟon fee for each mobilehome rental space within the park as may be established by resoluƟon of the city council (not to exceed the reasonable and necessary costs of administraƟon of this chapter). The city council may also provide that up to two thirds of that fee may be passed through to homeowners as special and limited rent increases if apporƟoned equally among the spaces and charged in 12 equal consecuƟve installments.

B. Late Charge. If a park owner does not pay the fee provided for in subsecƟon A of this secƟon within the Ɵme period established by the city council, a late charge shall be assessed in an amount established by resoluƟon. No late charges may be passed through as special and limited rent increases to homeowners.
71 C. Unpaid Fee. No hearing or other proceedings shall be scheduled to take place, and no rent increase will be granted or will take effect for any mobilehome park for which there are unpaid registraƟon fees.

On or aŌer March 28, 1991, no increase in space rents in excess of the amounts permiƩed pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.090(A) and (B) shall be effecƟve unless approved by the commission as set forth in this chapter.
§ 5.16.080.1 Rent increases—Commission approval.

On or aŌer March 28, 2026, no increase in rent charged by a Sublessor to a Subtenant in excess of the amounts permiƩed pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.090.1(A) shall be effecƟve unless approved by the commission as set forth in this chapter.
§ 5.16.090. Rent increases—ComputaƟon and determinaƟon.

A. Formula Increases. Space rents may be increased automaƟcally and annually by no more than the total percentage change in the CPI for the applicable CPI adjustment period as determined by the cityCommission, except that space rent shall not be increased by more than five percent and may be increased by up to two percent. CalculaƟon of the one-year limitaƟon on formula increases shall be from the date the last formula increase became effecƟve for that parƟcular space.

C.B.Special and Limited Rent and Rent Increases.

1. Government Required Services. The homeowner shall pay to the parks owner, on the herein described terms, no less than 60 days aŌer the park owner has noƟfied the homeowner in wriƟng, the increased costs to the park owner of government required services, which are to be included as part of the homeowner's rent but separately listed items on the monthly statement.
a. For the purposes of this chapter, "government required services" shall be defined as services required by governmental agencies which are new or in addiƟon to those services legally required to be provided by the park owner to homeowners or to the mobilehome park on March 28, 1991.
b. Such services include fees and charges legally levied by an agency of federal, state or local government upon the park owner. Such services do not include 72 predictable expenses for operaƟon of the mobilehome park, such as commonarea uƟliƟes expenses or expenses which maintain the safe and healthful use of mobilehome park faciliƟes.
c. The park owner's actual out-of-pocket costs of providing government required services may be charged to the homeowner upon 60 days' wriƩen noƟce, using the following formula: Amount actually paid by the park owner, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park, divided by 12 months, equals the sum for government-required services to be charged to the homeowner.

2. Capital Improvements.
a. (i) Necessary infrastructure improvements subject only to the provisions of subsecƟon (C)(2)(d) of this secƟon; and (ii) subject to the vote requirements and the capital improvement limitaƟons set forth in SecƟon 5.16.020, and also subject to review by the commission pursuant to SecƟon 5.16.110, the actual net costs of a capital improvement plus an interest charge to compensate the park owner for the use of money in making the improvement, as described below, may be charged to the homeowners upon 60 days' wriƩen noƟce, using the following formula: net amount actually paid by the park owner for the capital improvement, plus an interest charge as described below, divided by the total number of spaces in the mobilehome park affected by the improvement, divided by the amorƟzaƟon period for the capital improvement allowed by the Internal Revenue Service, equals the monthly sum for capital improvements to be charged to the homeowners and billed separately from space rent. b. The interest charge that may be added to the costs of materials and labor is the current rate derived from the then-current prime interest rate, computed on a declining balance over a five-year period with equal monthly payments (the fiveyear period represents the amount of Ɵme allowed for fully amorƟzing the cost of capital improvements).
c. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon (C)(2)(a) of this secƟon and SecƟon 5.16.100, the city manager may approve special and limited rent increases for necessary infrastructure improvements upon a showing by the park owners that the proposed improvement meets the requirements of SecƟon

D. 1. Sublease Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon A of this secƟon, upon sublease of a space and/or lease of a mobilehome, the space rent may be increased up to 73 15% of the rent otherwise permiƩed under this chapter. This rent surcharge shall be effecƟve only for the duraƟon of the sublease and shall be eliminated when and if the sublease is terminated. A sublease surcharge shall not become effecƟve unƟl 12 months aŌer the last vacancy increase pursuant to subsecƟon B of this secƟon. The sublease surcharge rent amount shall be calculated separately and shall not be included in the maximum allowable rent for the purposes of calculaƟng formula increases pursuant to subsecƟon A of this secƟon. The provisions of this subsecƟon shall not apply to those spaces granted hardship exempƟons pursuant to subsecƟon F of this secƟon for as long as the space is eligible for such exempƟon.

2. Absentee Owner Surcharge. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsecƟon A of this secƟon, in the event that a homeowner does not use his or her mobilehome at a mobilehome park as a primary or principal residence and the homeowner is not otherwise subject to subsecƟon (D)(1) of this secƟon, the homeowner's space rent may be increased up to 15% of the rent otherwise permiƩed under this chapter. This rent increase shall be effecƟve only unƟl the homeowner occupies his or her mobilehome at the mobilehome park as a primary residence or the homeowner subleases his or her space or mobilehome and becomes subject to subsecƟon (D)(1) of this secƟon. For purposes of this chapter, a primary residence is a residence where the homeowner resides for over 185 days during a calendar year.

1. QualificaƟon. To qualify for the sublease hardship exempƟon, the applicant must saƟsfy all of the following criteria:
a. The applicant must own a mobilehome at the applicable park, and must have occupied the mobilehome as his or her primary residence for a minimum of three years prior to applying for this exempƟon.
b. The applicant must present adequate evidence that he or she would qualify for the Low Income Rate Payer Assistance Program for Submetered Households. c. The combined value of assets owned by the applicant must not exceed $150,000 excluding the value of the mobilehome itself.
d. No person other than the applicant can declare the applicant as a dependent for purposes of federal or state taxes.
74 In the event that the applicant, aŌer receiving the hardship exempƟon, at any Ɵme ceases to saƟsfy all of the foregoing criteria, from that point on, the applicant will not be qualified to receive, and shall not receive, the hardship exempƟon.

2. Effect of ExempƟon. Each applicant who qualifies for the hardship exempƟon shall be exempt from the sublease surcharge provided in subsecƟon D of this secƟon. § 5.16.090.1 Maximum Sublease Rent—ComputaƟon and determinaƟon.

A. The rent charged by a Sublessor to one or more Subtenants residing in a single space shall not, in the aggregate, exceed the sum of the following:
a. The corresponding space rent;
b. $1,250, adjusted annually, beginning March 2027, based on the CPI, if the Subtenant(s) residing in the space are all within the same family (including parents/children, grandparents/grandchildren, siblings, aunts/uncles, great aunts / great uncles, and first and/or second cousins);
c. $1,650, adjusted annually, beginning March 2027, based on the CPI, if the Subtenants residing in the space are not all within the same family; and d. The actual cost to Sublessor of any uƟliƟes.

B. Notwithstanding the above, the Commission, upon applicaƟon by a Sublessor, may allow the Sublessor to charge up to an addiƟonal 50% of the amount specified in subparagraph (A)(b) or (A)(c), as applicable, if the Sublessor demonstrates an addiƟonal amount is necessary to provide Sublessor a reasonable return on the Sublessor’s purchase of a mobilehome.

C. No park owner may prohibit, or otherwise unreasonably refuse to allow, a mobile home owner to lease their mobile home(s) to a Subtenant, and may not retaliate against any such mobile home owner for doing so. Any contractual provision contrary to this subparagraph is void, as it is abhorrent to the public policy of the City. § 5.16.100. Rent adjustments—Commission review.

A. 1. In order to implement a rent increase as permiƩed under SecƟons 5.16.090 and

5.16.090.1 of this chapter or a rent decrease based on a reducƟon of housing services, the applicant must file with the commission a proposed rent schedule on the form provided by the commission. Any proposed capital improvement to be passed through to homeowners must be approved by the commission aŌer the park owner files an applicaƟon showing the amount of the expense, the amount to be passed through and proof of a majority vote in favor of the special and limited rent increases. Rent charged by a Sublessor to one or more Subtenants may be adjusted, not to exceed the limits set forth in paragraph (A) of SecƟon

5.16.090.1, without applicaƟon to the Commission.

2. Where the park owner is the applicant, the park owner shall serve each affected homeowner, and Subtenant if known, either personally or by cerƟfied mail, with wriƩen noƟce of the proposed increase, in accordance with state law, and with noƟce that a request for approval of same is being filed with the commission. Where a homeowner (or homeowners, or organizaƟon of homeowners) is the applicant, the homeowner or organizaƟon of homeowners homeownercity manager or their designee shall serve the affected park owner by mail or personally at the address and to the person designated in the 75 registraƟon form submiƩed by the park owner to receive noƟces on behalf of the park owner. Where a Subtenant (or subtenants, or organizaƟon of subtenants) is the applicant, theythe city manager or their designee shall serve the affected Sublessor by mail or personally at the address and to the person designated in the registraƟon form submiƩed by the Sublessor to receive noƟces on behalf of the Sublessor. Where a park owner or Sublessor is the applicant, Tthe applicant shall file proof of such service with the commission concurrent with the filing of the rent increase or decrease applicaƟon. Copies of the rent schedule, request for increaseall applicaƟons submiƩed by the park owner and supporƟng documentaƟon shall be available to any homeowner or Subtenant requesƟng same at the park owner's office in the affected mobilehome park. The registraƟon informaƟon and address for service shall be available to any applicant or potenƟal applicant upon request.

B. If the city manager or their designee determines that the applicaƟon is not complete, accurate, or not in compliance with this chapter, within 21 days of the date on which the applicaƟon was filedsubmiƩed, the city manager or their designee shall give wriƩen noƟce of the deficiencies to the applicant. In the event that the city manager or their designee determines that the applicaƟon is not complete or not in compliance with this chapter, the applicant may correct the idenƟfied deficiencies by amending the applicaƟon and/or contesƟng the determinaƟon to the chair of the Commission. If an applicant contests the determinaƟon, the chair of the Commission shall, within 14 days, decide whether the applicaƟon is complete and in compliance with this chapter. If the chair of the Commission does not act within that Ɵme, the applicaƟon shall be deemed complete, and a hearing shall be scheduled in accordance with paragraph (C) of this SecƟon. Any amendment of an applicaƟon consistent with this paragraph must be served in the same manner as the applicaƟon as set forth in paragraph (A)(2) of this SecƟon. No individual Commission member shall assist an applicant with compleƟng the applicaƟon form(s). A determinaƟon of incompleteness by the city manager or designee may be appealed to the Commission.

C. The city shall set a hearing on any requestapplicaƟon complying with the requirements of this chapter no sooner than 50 30 days and no later than 70, and for an applicaƟon submiƩed under 5.16.200 no later than 90, days aŌer the applicaƟon is accepted as complete. The city shall send wriƩen noƟce to the park ownerapplicant, who shall post such noƟce in a conspicuous place, reasonably selected to provide affected parƟes noƟce, of the Ɵme and place set for the hearing. If the commission approves an increase as requested, or lower than requested, the same shall take effect as noƟced by the park owner or as the commission may otherwise direct.

D. In the applicaƟon for rent adjustment under this chapter, the park owner shall indicate which, if any, of the mobilehome spaces are covered by leases or contracts which provide for more than a month-to-month tenancy, together with expiraƟon date of each such lease or contract. Any rent increase approved by the commission under this chapter shall not be applicable to spaces covered by such leases or contracts during the term of such leases or contracts.

E. Homeowner(s) in a mobilehome park may iniƟate commission review of a proposed land rent increase by filing with the city clerk a wriƩen peƟƟon. The peƟƟon shall be in substanƟally such form and contain such informaƟon as may be required by the commission. 76 § 5.16.110. Review hearings.

A. All review hearings conducted by the commission shall be open to the public.

C. In the event that either the affected park owner, or the homeowner(s), Sublessor(s), or Subtenant(s) should fail to appear at the hearing at the specified Ɵme and place, the commission: may hear and review such evidence as may be presented and make such decisions as if both all parƟes had been present.

D. All review hearings shall be tape-recorded. TapesRecordings shall be preserved for six months, or longer, if requested by eitherany party affected by the hearing, or for the duraƟon of any pending liƟgaƟon or claim.

E. The commission may promulgate regulaƟons to effect the purpose of this secƟon and to assure fair hearings.

F.E.
§ 5.16.120. Rent adjustments—Commission decision authority.

A. The commission's decision shall be based on the preponderance of the evidence at the hearing in the record, including the hearing. All parƟes to the hearing shall be advised of the commission's decision and given a copy of the findings upon which the decision is based, if any wriƩen findings are prepared by the Commission. When making a decision, the Commission shall consider reducƟons or increases to fees, assessments, and charges imposed by a government enƟty upon a space or by a state or locally mandated program relaƟng to housing contained in the Health and Safety Code.

B. Consistent with its findings, the commission may:

1. Permit the a requested increase to become effecƟve, in whole or in part;

2. Deny the a requested increase; and/or

3. If circumstances jusƟfy, oOrder a reducƟon in rent to a rate determined by the commission.; or

4. Order that the park owner reimburse the applicant(s) the full amount, or any part of the amount, of the applicaƟon fee where: (a) the applicant for a rent reducƟon was successful; (b) the park owner has not proven that the rent reducƟon ordered or the award of costs would deprive the park owner of a fair return as defined in this chapter; and (c) circumstances otherwise warrant the award of costs to the applicant.

C. If the commission finds that an increase that went into effect, or any porƟon thereof, that has been collected by a park owner or Sublessor is not jusƟfied is/was not jusƟfied or is/was not permissible under this Chapter, the park owner or Sublessor, as may be applicable, shall refund the amount found to be unjusƟfied to the homeowner or Subtenant, as may be applicable, within 60 days aŌer the decision of the commission is announced.

D. If the commission finds that a proposed increase, or any porƟon thereof that was previously inoperaƟve, is jusƟfied, the homeowner shall pay the amount found jusƟfied to the park owner within 60 days aŌer the decision of the commission is announced.

E.D.The conclusions and findings of the commission shall be final. 77 E. Any party dispuƟng the final conclusions and findings of the commission may seek review of the commission's acƟons pursuant to SecƟons 1094.5 and 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

F. If the Commission finds that a park owner or Sublessor willfully charged homeowner(s) or Subtenant(s) rent or other amount(s) greater than permiƩed by this Chapter, without substanƟal jusƟficaƟon, the Commission may order payment of up to treble the amount wrongfully charged or five-thousand dollars, whichever is greater.

F.G. If the Commission orders a return of rent, as described in paragraphs (C) or (F), and the park owner or Sublessor, as may be applicable, fails to pay the amount ordered within 60 days of the Commission’s decision, the homeowner(s) or Subtenant(s) may withhold the amount ordered from their subsequent rent payment(s).
§ 5.16.130. Hearing—Evidence and procedural irregulariƟes.

Formal rules of evidence or procedure which must be followed in court shall not apply to commission proceedings, except to the extent that the commission shall determine. No acƟon of the commission hereunder shall be held void or invalid or be set aside by any court on the grounds of any improper admission or rejecƟon of evidence, or by reason of any error, irregularity, informality, neglect or omission (hereinaŌer called "error") as to any maƩer pertaining to applicaƟons, noƟces, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendaƟons, or any maƩers of procedure whatever, including but not limited to those included in this secƟon, unless aŌer an examinaƟon of the enƟre case, including the evidence, the court shall be of the opinion that the error complained of was prejudicial, and that by reason of such error the party complaining or appealing sustained and suffered substanƟal injury, and that a different result would have been probable if such error had not occurred or existed. There shall be no presumpƟon that error is prejudicial or that injury was done if error is shown. § 5.16.140. ImplementaƟon guidelines. AŌer a noƟced-public hearing, as it deems necessary, the city council may adopt by resoluƟon guidelines to aid in the implementaƟon of this chapter. § 5.16.150. New and prospecƟve homeowners.

A. Prior to or at the Ɵme of agreeing to rent spacre to a new homeowner in a mobilehome park, the park owner shall provide each new homeowner or prospecƟve homeowner with a noƟce and copy of the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon ordinance, as currently in force.

Prior to or at the Ɵme of agreeing to rent a mobilehome to a new Subtenant in a mobilehome park, the Sublessor shall provide each new Subtenant or prospecƟve Subtenant with a noƟce and copy of the mobilehome park rent stabilizaƟon ordinance, as currently in force.

B. No park owner or Sublessor may require, directly or indirectly, that any resident or prospecƟve resident sign a lease or rental agreement that provides that it shall be exempt from local rent control or provides for space rent in excess of that permiƩed by this chapter as a condiƟon of tenancy in the park and no park owner or Sublessor may deny a tenancy to a prospecƟve purchaser of a mobilehome or Subtenant in the park on the ground that the prospecƟve purchaser or Subtenant will not sign such a lease or rental agreement.

C. The noƟce in paragraph (A) shall contain a place for the homeowner or Subtenant, as may be applicable, to acknowledge receipt of the noƟce. The park owner or Sublessor, as may be applicable, shall sign an acknowledgment that the required noƟce has been given to the 78 homeownerprovided and provide the homeowner or Subtenant, as may be applicable, with a copy of the executed acknowledgment. The park owner or Sublessor, as may be applicable, shall maintain a copy of the executed acknowledgment as long as the applicable tenancy conƟnues.
§ 5.16.160. Homeowner's right of refusal.

A homeowner may refuse to pay any increase in rent or other charge which is in violaƟon of this chapter.

Such refusal to pay shall be a defense in any acƟon brought to recover possession of a mobilehome or mobilehome space or to collect the rent increase.
§ 5.16.170. Retaliatory evicƟon.

Notwithstanding SecƟon 5.16.160, in any acƟon brought to recover possession of a mobilehome space or mobilehome, the court shall consider as grounds for denial any violaƟon of any provision of this chapter. Further, the determinaƟon that the acƟon was brought in retaliaƟon for the exercise of any rights conferred by this chapter shall be grounds for denial. Any acƟon brought within one year of an peƟƟon or complaintapplicaƟon filed with the commission by the homeowner or Subtenant pursuant to this chapter shall be presumed to be retaliatory; this presumpƟon affects the burden of proof, and is rebuƩable by the park owner or Sublessor.
§ 5.16.180. ViolaƟon—Civil remedies.

If any park owner or Sublessor demands, accepts, receives or retains any payment of rent in excess of the maximum lawful space rent, as determined under this chapter, then the homeowners in such mobilehome park affected by such violaƟon, individually or by class acƟon, may seek relief in a court of appropriate jurisdicƟon for injuncƟve relief and damages. The A prevailing party homeowner or Subtenant willshall be enƟtled to recover costs and reasonable aƩorneys' fees as part of any court judgment. A prevailing park owner or Sublessor shall not recover any costs, unless the court finds the homeowner or Subtenant’s acƟon or defense to be frivolous, unreasonable, or without foundaƟon. § 5.16.190. ViolaƟon—Penalty.
(A) Criminal penalty. Any person violaƟng any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Any person convicted of a misdemeanor under the provisions of this chapter shall be punished by a fine of not more than $500 or by imprisonment for a period of not more than six months, or by both. Each violaƟon of any provision of this chapter, and each day during which any such violaƟon is commiƩed, permiƩed or conƟnued, shall consƟtute a separate offense.
(A)(B) Civil penalty. Any person violaƟng any provision, or failing to comply with any requirement, of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty of up to $100 per violaƟon, or $200 per willful violaƟon. Any aggrieved person may file a civil acƟon on behalf of the City of Malibu and other aggrieved persons in a court of competent jurisdicƟon to recover the civil penalty established by this paragraph, in which case any civil penalƟes recovered shall be distributed as follows: ten percent to the aggrieved person(s) who filed the acƟon; twenty-five percent to the other aggrieved persons; and sixty-five percent to the City of Malibu for the purpose of enforcing this Chapter and educaƟng the public concerning this Chapter. 79 § 5.16.200. Just and reasonable return.

A park owner may file a rent adjustment applicaƟon for one, some or all the spaces in a mobilehome park in order to establish the maximum allowable rent or to achieve a fair and reasonable return.

Homeowners may file a rent adjustment applicaƟon based on reducƟon in services or other grounds established by this-chapter or regulaƟons promulgated pursuant thereto. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the grant of a rent adjustment upon applicaƟon by a park owner when required by law to permit a fair and reasonable return to the park owner. The city shall receive relevant evidence, in accordance with applicable regulaƟons, demonstraƟng that a landlord park owner or sublessor is not receiving a fair and reasonable return in determining these applicaƟons. § 5.16.210. Mobilehome park relocaƟon impact reports.

B. DefiniƟons. For purposes of this secƟon, the following definiƟons shall apply in addiƟon to those listed in SecƟon 5.16.020.
"Advisory agency" means the planning department, commission, or other authority designated by the City Council, or hearing officer as designated by the city council. "Change of use" means a use of a mobilehome park for a purpose other than the rental, or the holding out for rent, of two or more mobilehome sites to accommodate mobilehomes for human habitaƟon. "Change of use" includes, but is not limited to, a change of the park or any porƟon thereof to a condominium, stock cooperaƟve, or any form of ownership wherein spaces within the park are to be sold, and the cessaƟon of use of all or a porƟon of the park, whether immediately or on a gradual basis, or the closure of the park. "Change of use" shall not include mere purchase of the park by its exisƟng homeowners. "Comparable housing" means housing which is comparable in floor space area, deck and lot size, and number of bedrooms and other relevant factors to the mobilehome to which comparison is being made, which housing meets the minimum standards of the State Uniform Housing Code.
"Comparable mobilehome park" means any other mobilehome park substanƟally equivalent in terms of park condiƟon, ameniƟes, ocean views and beach access and other relevant factors.
"Date of applicaƟon for change of use" means the date of filing of an applicaƟon for rezoning, general plan amendment, use permit, site development permit or other discreƟonary development approval under this code, which applicaƟon seeks approval of a change of use of a mobilehome park, its or the date of the closure, or cessaƟon of use. "Eligible homeowner" means a homeowner whose mobilehome or manufactured home was located in a mobilehome park on the date of the applicaƟon for a change of use.

C. General Requirements.

1. Any person who files an applicaƟon for a rezoning, general plan amendment, subdivision map, use permit, site development permit or for any other discreƟonary development approval, for the purpose of a change of use of a mobilehome park, or closure, or cessaƟon of use, shall file with the advisory agency a report on the impact of the conversion, closure, or cessaƟon of use (hereinaŌer "closure") upon the residents of the 80 mobilehome park who will be displaced, no later than the filing of the first such applicaƟon necessary to authorize such closure.

4. No building permit shall be issued on property occupied by a mobilehome park at the effecƟve date of this chapter or hereinaŌer for uses other than those associated with the mobile home park use and allowed under the special use permit, unƟl approval under this secƟon has been received.

4.5.The park owner shall give any wriƩen noƟce to homeowners required by state law.

D. Conversion Impact Report.

1. The conversion impact report shall include a replacement and relocaƟon plan that addresses the availability of adequate replacement housing in mobilehome parks and the cost of relocaƟng displaced residents.

2. In order to evaluate adequately and address those issues, the conversion impact report shall contain the following informaƟon:
a. At the applicant’s expense and if there are displaced residents, an appraisal of the onsite value, depreciated replacement value, and removal value of the mobilehome of each eligible resident in the park. The appraisal must be prepared by a State-cerƟfied appraiser, approved by the City, with experience establisheding the value of mobilehomes, and shall be based upon the current in-place value of the mobilehome and shall assume the conƟnuaƟon of the mobilehome park.
b. The names, addresses and mobilehome site idenƟficaƟon numbers of all persons owning mobilehomes within the mobilehome park and of all mobilehome residents on the date of applicaƟon for change of use;
cb. The age, including date of manufacture, of each mobilehome within such park, including the type of mobilehome, width characterisƟcs, size, and number idenƟfying the mobilehome site being occupied;
dc. A list of vacant mobilehome sites in comparable mobilehome parks within a 50 mile radius of the park which is the subject of the applicaƟon or request; ed. The list shall contain a schedule of site rental rates for each park listed and the criteria of the management of each park for acceptance of new homeowners and used mobilehomes;
fe. The names, addresses and telephone numbers of one or more housing specialists from the list compiled by the advisory agency, and the names, addresses and telephone numbers and fee schedules of persons qualified as mobilehome movers and of persons who are qualified appraisers of mobilehomes and an explanaƟon of the services the housing specialists will provide;
gf. The applicant may designate other housing specialists, and mobilehome movers and appraisers; provided, that use of any such persons pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to approval by the advisory agency;
81 hg. A relocaƟon plan which will include:
i. Timetable for implemenƟng the physical relocaƟon of mobilehomes, ii. ImplementaƟon of relocaƟon assistance
iii. Payment of relocaƟon costs, and
iv. The requested “change of use”; cConversion of the park to one or more other uses; cessaƟon of use, or closure of the park.

3. The applicaƟon for change of use shall include within the conversion impact reportreplacement and relocaƟon plan the steps proposed to miƟgate any adverse impact on the ability of displaced homeowners to find adequate housing in a mobilehome park, including the reasonable costs of relocaƟon.
a. All eligible homeowners and all mobilehome tenants of eligible homeowners shall be provided with the services of one or more housing experts to assist them in relocaƟng to available and adequate housing upon their request. Any such experts shall be those approved pursuant to this secƟon.

E. Advisory Agency DeterminaƟon

1. Before approving a change of use, the advisory agency shall:
a. Review the conversion impact report and any relevant documentaƟon b. Make a finding as to whether or not approval of the park closure and the park’s conversion into its intended new use, taking into consideraƟon both the impact report as a whole and the overall housing availability within the local jurisdicƟon, will result in or materially contribute to a shortage of housing opportuniƟes and choices for low- and moderate-income households within the local jurisdicƟon.

2. Factors to Consider.
ia. A factor to be considered is that the conversion will not result in the displacement of low-income individuals or households who cannot afford rents charged in other parks. iib. A factor to be considered is iŌ the conversion is to another residenƟal use, the homeowners have first opportunity to occupy and the construcƟon schedule will not result in long-term displacement.
b. No benefits shall be provided to any person who is renƟng a mobilehome from the owner of the mobilehome park where such person shall have executed a wriƩen agreement with such mobilehome park owner waiving his or her rights to any such benefits. No such waiver shall he valid unless it contains the text of this secƟon, and unless such person shall have executed a wriƩen acknowledgment that he or she has read and understands his or her rights pursuant to this chapter and knowingly agrees to waive them.
cb3. An eligible homeowner or tenant of an eligible homeowner may enter a wriƩen agreement with the park owner to waive his or her right to benefits specified under statute provided that the park owner gives other benefits comparable to those mandated by statute.

To be valid, such waiver shall contain the text of this secƟon and include a signed wriƩen 82 acknowledgement that the person waiving his or her rights has read and understands his or her rights pursuant to this chapter and knowingly agrees to waive them. [Propose language that would allow a knowing and informed waiver so long as benefits are comparable to the benefits under statute]

4. In order to facilitate the intenƟons of the homeowners or tenants and an applicant for a change of use with regard to a change of use, cessaƟon of use, or closure, the parƟes may agree to mutually saƟsfactory relocaƟon assistance. To bhe valid such an agreement shall be in wriƟng, shall include a provision staƟng that the homeowner or tenant is aware of the provisions of this chapter, shall include a copy of this chapter as an aƩachment, shall include a provision in at least 10 point type which clearly states the right to seek and the importance of obtaining an aƩorney's advice prior to signing the agreement, and shall be draŌed in form and content otherwise required by applicable state law. Any person signing such an agreement may rescind it in wriƟng within 10 business days of final approval of change of use. Any such agreement which is procured by fraud, misrepresentaƟon, coercion or duress of any kind shall be void and unenforceable.

FE. Hearing and NoƟce

1. Upon the receipt of an impact report, within 30 days the advisory agency shall examine the same and advise the applicant whether it is complete. When a complete impact report has been filed and accepted by the advisory agency, within 930 days the advisory agency shall set a Ɵme, place and date for a public hearing.

2. At least 7530 days prior to the public hearing, the advisory agency shall mail noƟce to the applicant and the homeowners of the date, Ɵme and place of the meeƟng.

3. At least 6015 days prior to the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency on the applicaƟon for change of use and conversion impact report, the applicant shall provide the homeowner and all other persons described with a copy of this chapter, a copy of the conversion impact report, and date and Ɵme for an informaƟonal meeƟng pursuant to subsecƟon (E)(4) of this secƟon.

5. Not less than 10 days prior to the date of the scheduled public hearing before the advisory agency, the applicant shall conduct an informaƟonal meeƟng for the residents of the 83 mobilehome park regarding the status of the applicaƟon, the Ɵming of proposed relocaƟon of residents, proposed relocaƟon costs and assistance, and the contents of the conversion impact report. The meeƟng shall be conducted on the premises of the mobilehome park. The housing specialist(s) designated in the impact report shall be present at such meeƟng.

65. Within five days prior to the public hearing, the applicant shall file with the advisory agency a statement made under penalty of perjury that all requirements pursuant to subsecƟons (E)(3) and (4) of this secƟon have been complied with and include date, Ɵme, and place where such meeƟng as required by subsecƟon (E)(4) of this secƟon occurred.

GF. Findings and Decision. At the conclusion of the hearing, the advisory agency shall render its decision. The advisory agency shall approve, condiƟonally approve or disapprove the relocaƟon impact report. The advisory agency shall approve the relocaƟon impact report if it finds that the relocaƟon impact report contains the informaƟon required pursuant to this secƟon. In approving the relocaƟon impact report, the advisory agency may impose such condiƟons as it finds necessary to miƟgate the adverse impacts on the residents; however, any steps required to be taken by the park owner pursuant to this secƟon shall not exceed the reasonable costs of relocaƟon. NoƟce of the advisory agency acƟon shall be mailed to the park owner, to all homeowners, to all Subtenants, to all Sublessors, and to all persons who have filed wriƩen request therefor.

HG. Request for Appeal. The park owner, or any homeowner, or any Subtenant, or any Sublessor may appeal the advisory agency's decision to the city council. The appeal shall be filed with the city on a form provided for that purpose within 10 days aŌer the acƟon of the advisory agency. When an appeal is filed, it shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount determined according to SecƟon 5.16.070. The city shall, within 45 days, set a Ɵme and date for a hearing, and shall mail wriƩen noƟce of such hearing to the park owner, all homeowners, all Subtenants, all Sublessors, the person requesƟng the hearing, the advisory agency and all persons who have filed wriƩen request therefor, at least 15 days prior to the hearing.

IH. Extensions. Any of the Ɵme limits specified in this secƟon may be extended by mutual consent of park owner and the advisory agency, or the city council, on appeal, with noƟce to affected homeownersparƟes, except where prohibited by state law.

JI. ExpiraƟon and Extension of RelocaƟon Impact Report. The approval of a relocaƟon impact report shall become null and void aŌer 36 months from the date of the mailing of the final approval of the relocaƟon impact report. ThereaŌer, the park owner shall not convert, close or cease the use of the park unƟl such Ɵme as a new relocaƟon impact report is approved.

However, upon applicaƟon of the park owner, filed with the advisory agency on or before the date of expiraƟon, the relocaƟon impact report may be extended by the advisory agency up to an addiƟonal 36 months. An applicaƟon for an extension shall be subject to the noƟce and hearing procedures of this secƟon.
84 KJ. CondiƟons. In the approval of a mobilehome park conversion, the city may aƩach condiƟons deemed reasonable in order to miƟgate the impacts associated with the conversion. Such condiƟons shall not be limited to, but may include, the following:

2. The homeowners be given the opƟon of a long-term lease of the land and purchase of the improvements.

3. The city may aƩach an effecƟve date upon their approval of the conversion. This date will provide sufficient Ɵme for the relocaƟon of the mobilehome to other parks.

LK. RevocaƟon and Amendment. Any Ɵme prior to the change of use, cessaƟon of use, orclosure of the mobilehome park, the advisory agency may, in its discreƟon, and upon good cause shown, iniƟate proceedings for the revocaƟon or amendment of the approval of the applicaƟon for change of usean impact report. Good cause may include, but is not limited to, change of circumstances which render the condiƟons or requirements of the relocaƟon conversion impact report no longer necessary or appropriate, negligent or fraudulent misrepresentaƟon of fact relaƟng to the relocaƟon conversion impact report, or noncompliance with the condiƟons of the conversion impact report. Prior to revoking or amending the approval of the applicaƟona relocaƟon impact report, the advisory agency shall conduct a hearing in accordance with the applicable procedures set forth in subsecƟon FE of this secƟon. Upon revocaƟon, the park owner shall not convert, close, cease or change the use of the park unƟl such Ɵme as a new relocaƟon conversion impact report is approved or other requirement under this Chapter is saƟsfied. Such revocaƟon or amendment is subject to the same request for hearing as is provided in subsecƟon HG of this secƟon.

ML. EvicƟons Pending Compliance with RelocaƟon Impact Report. TerminaƟon of a tenancy of any resident homeowner or subtenant pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon 798.56 or any other provision of law shall not relieve the park owner of its obligaƟon to comply with the condiƟons or requirements of the relocaƟon conversƟon impact report applicable to that residenthomeowner or subtenant. However, if the terminaƟon of tenancy is based on subdivisions (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) or (f) of SecƟon 798.56 of the Civil Code, the advisory agency, upon request by the park owner, may grant to the park owner extensions of Ɵme within which to comply with the condiƟons of the relocaƟon impact report.

MN. AddiƟonal Authority of the Advisory Agency. If, notwithstanding the fact that the park owner has not served a six months' or 12 months' noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy on the residentshomeowners, the advisory agency finds that the park owner is aƩempƟng to close or convert a park, then the advisory agency shall require the filing of a relocaƟon conversion impact report.

NO. ObligaƟons of Applicant AŌer Approval of the ApplicaƟon for Change of Use and Conversion Impact Report. AŌer the date of the final determinaƟon that approving the conversion impact 85 report and change of use applicaƟoncomplies with the requirements of this chapter, the applicant shall undertake or be responsible for performance of the following obligaƟons:

2. Not less than 120 days prior to the date any homeowner is required to vacate the mobilehome park, any cash or monetary relocaƟon costs required by this chapter shall be paid to such homeowner, to such Subtenant, to any former resident eligible for such costs, or to any person, firm or corporaƟon performing relocaƟon related services for the homeowner or Subtenant, as the homeowner or Subtenant may direct. If the applicant purchases the mobilehome the homeowner shall be required to promptly submit to the applicant all documents necessary to transfer complete Ɵtle and ownership of such mobilehome to the applicant, free and clear of all security interest, liens, or other encumbrances.

3. The date upon which any resident of the mobilehome park is required to vacate such park, or upon which any mobilehome is required to be removed from the mobilehome park, shall be not less than six months from the date of noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy pursuant to Civil Code SecƟon798.56(f)). The applicant shall provide homeowners with a copy of the final impact report at the same Ɵme the six-month’s noƟce of terminaƟon of tenancy is provided.

4. If the owner of the mobilehome park, the applicant homeowner or tenant specifically requests that any of the Ɵme limitaƟons required by this secƟon, except those provided by State law, be modified, the city advisory agency, or City Council on appeal, shall consider any such modificaƟon and evidence relaƟng to the need therefor at the public hearing on the change of use applicaƟon and conversion impact report. The advisory agency, or City Council on appeal, city shall have the power to make modificaƟon in such Ɵme limits, both in response to a request and on its own moƟon, in conjuncƟon with any approval of an applicaƟon and conversion impact report, as iƩhe city may deem just and reasonable.

O. P. Payment of RelocaƟon Assistance Benefits—Prerequisite to Issuance of Building Permit to Redevelop Park. No building permit shall be issued for the development of any real property which has been or is being converted from a mobilehome park pursuant to this chapter unless and unƟl the applicant or the owner of the property, as the case may be, who is responsible for payment of any required monetary relocaƟon assistance, shall have filed with the advisory agency a verified statement made under penalty of perjury that relocaƟon assistance payments required pursuant to this chapter have been paid. Such statement shall specify in itemized form each payee, the amount paid, the date of payment, and the type of relocaƟon or other assistance for which each such payment was made.
§ 5.16.220 ViolaƟons
86 ViolaƟons. ViolaƟons of this secƟon shall consƟtute a misdemeanor. In addiƟon, any park owner or applicant who violates any rights of any homeowner or mobilehome subtenant established under this chapter shall be liable to the person for actual damages caused by such violaƟon, plus costs and reasonable aƩorneys' fees. No park owner shall take any willful acƟon to threaten, retaliate against or harass any park resident with the intent to prevent such residents from exercising his or hertheir rights under this chapter.
87 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 KeyCite Yellow Flag
Called into Doubt by MHC Financing, Ltd. v. City of San Rafael, N.D.Cal., January 29, 2008 KeyCite Overruling Risk
Overruling Risk Lingle v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., U.S., May 23, 2005 854 F.Supp. 1476
United States District Court,
C.D. California.

The ADAMSON COMPANIES, a California Partnership, Plaintiff, v.

CITY OF MALIBU; and City Council for the City of Malibu, Defendants.

The KISSEL COMPANY, INC., Plaintiff,
v.

CITY OF MALIBU; and City Council for the City of Malibu, Defendants.

Nos. CV 92–1027 MRP, CV 92–1028 MRP.
|
June 6, 1994.

Synopsis
Owners of mobile home parks brought action challenging constitutionality of city's mobile home rent control ordinance. The District Court, Pfaelzer, J., held that: (1) correction of alleged monopoly driven power disparity could not justify ordinance absent any evidence that shortage driven monopoly existed; (2) protection of tenants' investments was legitimate governmental interest, as was protection of low-income tenants; (3) rent rollback, moratorium, and fair return provisions were facially invalid and violative of substantive due process; (4) ordinance in all other respects survived facial due process and equal protection challenges; (5) facial takings challenge was ripe for judicial review; but (6) ordinance did not effect physical or regulatory taking.

Ordered accordingly.

West Headnotes (31)
[1] Landlord and Tenant Validity
Even if each element of city's regulatory scheme governing mobile home parks was constitutional, scheme would fail if, taken as a whole, it exceeded constitutional bounds. [2] Constitutional Law Economic rights and regulation
Substantive due process challenge to economic regulation must satisfy two-part test: (1) ordinance must serve legitimate purpose, and (2) means employed must be rationally related to legitimate purpose. U.S.C.A.

Const.Amend. 14.
[3] Constitutional Law Charges and prices in general
State price-control regulation is unconstitutional under due process clause only if arbitrary, discriminatory, or Attachment 4
88 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 2 demonstrably irrelevant to legitimate government purpose; government may intervene in response to threat of monopoly pricing, or to remedy discrepancy between supply and demand of certain product, or to protect consumer welfare. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[4] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
For purposes of substantive due process challenge to city's mobile home rent control ordinance, city's stated purpose of correcting monopoly driven power disparity between park owners and tenants did not constitute legitimate justification for ordinance, absent any showing that shortage driven monopoly in fact existed in city's parks, notwithstanding city's reference to findings under county's rent control ordinance and notwithstanding that parties' relative positions placed owners, in very limited way, in superior bargaining position. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
[5] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
For purposes of substantive due process challenge to city's mobile home rent control ordinance, city's stated purpose of protecting investments tenants had made in their mobile homes was legitimate justification for ordinance, notwithstanding park owners' contention that tenants' investments in their homes did not need such protection in light of escalating prices that they were receiving upon sale of their homes. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[6] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
For purposes of substantive due process challenge to city's mobile home rent control ordinance, city had legitimate interest in protecting tenants with lower or fixed incomes, notwithstanding that mobile home park population in general was wealthier than average such population and incidental benefit ordinance would have for wealthier tenants. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U. [7] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Although ordinance that effects transfer of wealth is not per se unconstitutional, city did not have legitimate interest in effecting such transfer under its mobile home rent control ordinance absent some other justification; reduction of mobile home park owners' incomes was not, of itself, legitimate interest. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
[8] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Rent increase limits imposed by city's mobile home rent control ordinance were rationally related to city's legitimate interest in protecting tenants' investments. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, § 6708A.
[9] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Eight-year rent rollback provision of city's mobile home rent control ordinance was not rationally related to any legitimate governmental interest and violated substantive due process; there was no showing that there were any 89 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 3 excessive rent increases prior to imposition of moratorium, or that rollback was needed to protect tenants' investments against action by park owners. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, §§ 6701B, 6705C.
[10] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Three-year moratorium imposed by city's mobile home rent control ordinance at end of long-term leases, and freeze on rent increases until two years after date of enactment, were not rationally related to legitimate purposes for which ordinance was enacted, and provisions violated substantive due process; there was no evidence of arbitrary rent increases, and provisions did not include any reasonable adjustment mechanism. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Ordinance, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, § 6708A. [11] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Although rent moratorium imposed while city considered mobile home rent control ordinance could achieve legitimate purpose of limiting increases in reaction to possibility of impending rent control, city did not have power to continue moratorium indefinitely, and time would come when moratorium lasted so long as to violate due process.

U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U. 1 Case that cites this headnote
[12] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Vacancy control provision of city's mobile home rent control ordinance, pursuant to which large part of placement value of homes was allocated to tenants rather than park owners, did not by itself violate substantive due process, notwithstanding owners' contention that placement value arose from value of land and thus belonged entirely to them. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, § 6708B. 1 Case that cites this headnote
[13] Constitutional Law Landlord and Tenant
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Closure conversion restrictions contained in city's mobile home rent control ordinance, pursuant to which park owner contemplating closing park property or converting it to another use had to prepare report detailing impact of closure or conversion on residents of park, was rationally related to legitimate governmental interest in protecting tenants' investments and did not violate substantive due process. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, §§ 6723D.2.g, D.3, C.3, F, G.
1 Case that cites this headnote
[14] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Pass-through provisions of city's mobile home rent control ordinance did not violate substantive due process even though they did not provide park owners with method for increasing rent; provisions were intended to assure that park owners received fair return on their investments, and park owners did not submit any evidence that provisions did not advance such legitimate interest. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, § 6708D.1, D.2.
[15] Constitutional Law Rent control
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
90 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 4 Procedure adopted under city's mobile home rent control ordinance to adjust base rent, in order to assure park owners fair return, was too restrictive and violated substantive due process; ordinance allowed owners to apply for increase only under limited economic circumstances, and owners were given no recourse for changes due to other economic conditions or occurrences during eight-year period preceding effective date of base rate. U.S.C.A.

Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U, §§ 6708D.2, 6712A, C. [16] Landlord and Tenant Rent control
City's mobile home rent control ordinance, when viewed in conjunction with zoning ordinance, was reasonably related to legitimate governmental purpose of protecting tenants' investments, even though regulatory scheme effectively required park owners to continue to operate parks for return close to constitutional minimum in perpetuity and even though there was lack of evidence that owners were abusing any power they had over tenants. U.S.C.A.

Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 9, Ch. 9. [17] Landlord and Tenant Rent control
Court could not invalidate mobile home rent control ordinance based on suggestion of improper motivation on part of city council where proper motivation was also presented. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
[18] Constitutional Law Rational Basis Standard; Reasonableness Unless classification warrants some sort of heightened review because it jeopardizes exercise of fundamental right or categorizes on basis of inherently suspect characteristic, equal protection clause requires only that classification rationally further legitimate government interest. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14. 1 Case that cites this headnote
[19] Constitutional Law Landlord and Tenant Issues
Landlord and Tenant Rent control
City's decision to apply controls only to mobile home rentals rather than to all residential rentals was rationally related to legitimate governmental interest in protecting tenants' investments, which investments were unique in relation to other residential rentals. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
[20] Eminent Domain What Constitutes a Taking; Police and Other Powers Distinguished Where government authorizes physical occupation of property, or actually takes title, Fifth Amendment's takings clause generally requires compensation; alternately, where government merely regulates use of property, compensation is required only if considerations such as purpose of regulation or extent to which it deprives owner of economic use of property suggests that regulation has unfairly singled out property owner to bear burden that should be borne by public as a whole. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5. [21] Eminent Domain Conditions precedent to action; ripeness Mobile home park owners' facial challenge under takings clause of Fifth Amendment to city's mobile home rent control ordinance was ripe for adjudication even though owners had not pursued available state remedies to secure just compensation; ordinance limited return on owners' present use of property, and court would not have to speculate regarding owners' intended use of property. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
[22] Eminent Domain Conditions precedent to action; ripeness Facial challenge under takings clause of Fifth Amendment is ripe if to determine whether there is taking would not require court to speculate regarding what property was taken by regulation. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5. 91 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 5 [23] Eminent Domain What Constitutes a Taking; Police and Other Powers Distinguished Government effects physical taking only where it requires landowner to submit to physical occupation of its land.

U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5.
[24] Eminent Domain Rent control; housing
City's mobile home rent control ordinance did not effect physical taking despite park owners' contention that ordinance, when combined with zoning ordinance, required owners to continue to use their land for mobile home parks in perpetuity; despite restrictions imposed on park owners, owners had invited tenants onto their land, and regulation of relationship between owners and tenants thus could not rise to level of physical taking. U.S.C.A.

Const.Amend. 5; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 9, Ch. 9. [25] Eminent Domain Conditions precedent to action; ripeness Mobile home park owners' “as applied” takings challenge to city's mobile home rent control ordinance was not ripe for judicial review where owners had not made change-of-use proposal and had not requested any rent increases, notwithstanding owners' contention that such steps would be futile because city had already indicated its intransigence. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U. [26] Eminent Domain Municipal corporations and local government in general; annexation of territory In regulatory taking case involving local government, question is whether diminution of value or transfer of rights caused by local government was result of action justified by police power or instead was result of action that can be justified only by power of eminent domain. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5. [27] Eminent Domain Necessity of making compensation in general Under Fifth Amendment as incorporated by Fourteenth Amendment, just compensation is required only if local government action is not within legitimate scope of local government's power. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14. [28] Eminent Domain Municipal corporations and local government in general; annexation of territory Ordinance effects regulatory taking if ordinance does not substantially advance legitimate state interests or denies owner economically viable use of his land. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14. 1 Case that cites this headnote
[29] Eminent Domain Conditions precedent to action; ripeness Any claim that city's mobile home rent control ordinance denied park owners economically viable use of their land was not ripe for judicial review inasmuch as such determination required inquiries and evaluations concerning economic impact of ordinance on specific property in question, which was not possible in context of facial challenge. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U. [30] Eminent Domain Municipal corporations and local government in general; annexation of territory In context of regulatory takings claim, requirement that ordinance substantially advance legitimate purpose finds its practical application in examination of whether nexus exists between function of ordinance and purpose ordinance is intended to achieve. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14.
[31] Eminent Domain Rent control; housing
City's mobile home rent control ordinance did not on its face constitute regulatory taking, even though ordinance was far more onerous than necessary to solve problem that it set out to address; ordinance acted directly to promote legitimate interest of protecting tenants' investments. U.S.C.A. Const.Amends. 5, 14; Malibu Municipal Code, Art. 6, Ch. 7, Ordinance 48–U.
92 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 6 Attorneys and Law Firms
*1480 Thomas E. Gibbs, Michael S. Greger, Allen, Matkins, Leck, Gamble & Mallory, Irvine, CA, for plaintiff the Adamson Companies.

Garrett L. Hanken, Elizabeth Watson, Kiersten Y. Mayer, Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman & Machtinger, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff the Kissel Co., Inc.

Michael Jenkins, City Atty., City of Malibu, Rochelle Browne, Saskia T. Asamura, Mitchell E. Abbott, Richards, Watson & Gershow, P.C., Los Angeles, CA, for City of Malibu, and City Council for the City of Malibu.

OPINION
PFAELZER, District Judge.

I. BACKGROUND
On December 3, 1991, the City of Malibu (“City”) acting through its City Council (“City Council”) adopted a mobile home rent control ordinance (“rent control ordinance”). Malibu Municipal Code, Article VI, Chapter 7, Ordinance 48–U. Plaintiffs The Kissel Co. (“Kissel”) and The Adamson Companies (“Adamson”) are the owners of the only two mobile home parks within the City. Kissel owns a park called Paradise Cove Mobile Home Park (“Paradise Cove”) and Adamson owns a park called Point Dume Club (“Point Dume”).

The plaintiffs brought these companion cases to obtain a judgment that the rent control ordinance violates the constitutional guarantees of substantive due process and equal protection, as well as the guarantee against taking property without just compensation under the Fifth Amendment.1
Mobile home rentals are quite different from apartment rentals. The “tenant” buys a mobile home or “coach” which he then places on a space or “pad” in a mobile home *1481 park. In California, the tenants usually rent or lease the space from a park owner. In addition to the investment in the coach and its initial placement, most tenants invest in permanent improvements such as landscaping, decks and patios. Likewise, the park owner makes an investment not only in the land, but also in providing facilities for the use of the tenants, such as private roads, plumbing and common areas. Thus, unlike an ordinary rental, both the park owner and the tenant make substantial capital investments in a mobile home tenancy.

Mobile homes, despite their name, are not usually mobile. Once placed in a park, few are moved.2 This is principally due to the cost of moving a coach which is often equal to or greater than the value of the coach itself. Also, many mobile home parks will not accept older coaches so that after a time, the coach may be rendered effectively immobile. Thus, the park owner, absent regulation, theoretically has the power to exact a premium from the tenant who, as a practical matter, cannot move the coach.

In this situation, if the tenant decides to live elsewhere, he does not move the coach, but rather sells it “in place.” The buyer, then, becomes the new tenant. The California Mobile Home Residency Law, not challenged here, forbids the termination of a mobile home tenancy without cause, as well as the assessment of transfer fees, and requires that the park owner accept any buyer of the coach as a tenant so long as the purchaser has the ability to pay the rent. Cal.Civ.Code § 798 et seq. As a 93 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 7 consequence of the tenant's guaranteed occupancy and his freedom to sell without penalty, any economic power the park owner might potentially have over the tenant is significantly lessened.

A number of jurisdictions, including the City, also have enacted rent control ordinances to protect mobile home tenants because of a concern that the California Mobile Home Residency Law does not go far enough. The economic justification most often advanced for such ordinances is that even though the space is freely marketable by the tenants, the park owner can, by raising the rent to unreasonable levels, effectively destroy the tenant's ability to realize a fair return on his investment by selling the coach in place. Theoretically, in a free market, such behavior would eventually put the park owner out of business because there would be other park owners willing to offer mobile home spaces on more reasonable terms. The City argues, however, that there is no operational market, but rather a monopoly3 on the part of the park owner created by the scarcity of mobile home spaces. The existence of this monopoly is a further justification claimed by the City for the enactment of the rent control ordinance.

A. The Rent Control Ordinance
The rent control ordinance applies to all mobile home spaces in the City with the exception of those spaces subject to longterm leases governed by state law. The plaintiffs challenge the following provisions of the rent control ordinance:

1. Rent Rollback—The rent control ordinance requires that mobile home rents be rolled back to the rates in effect on December 31, 1984 and then adjusted by the City Manager according to the terms of the Los Angeles County Rent Control Ordinance and Park Conversion Ordinance (“LA Ordinance”). The LA Ordinance had governed the rents in Paradise Cove prior to the incorporation of the City in 1991. Rent Control Ordinance § 6701 B, 67056701 B, 6705 C. Point Dume was exempt from the LA Ordinance.4 In effect the rollback gives the rent control ordinance an eight year retroactive application. *1482 2. Rent Control—The rent control ordinance allows increases in rents per year only up to 75% of the increase in the Consumer Price Index or 5%, whichever is less. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 A.

3. Rent Freezes—The rent control ordinance prohibits any rent increases prior to March 28, 1993, thereby freezing rents in the parks for two years after its enactment. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 A. Additionally, upon the expiration of any exempt long-term lease, the ordinance freezes rents for three years thereafter. Id. The ordinance provides one exception to the three year freeze at the expiration of long term leases. If the park owner does not increase the rent pursuant to the lease between March 28, 1992 and March 28, 1993, no formula increases are allowed for one year following the expiration of the lease. Id.

4. Vacancy Control—Upon the vacancy of a space, the rent control ordinance originally allowed an increase of not more than 18% over the last rent in effect prior to a vacancy.5 Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 B. In September 1992, the City Council amended the rent control ordinance to reduce the allowable increase to 10% when a vacancy occurs. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 B., as amended, September 16, 1992.

5. Closure Conversion Restrictions—Initially, the rent control ordinance required that if the park owner wished to close the park, it was required to prepare a “conversion impact report” which, among other things, required the payment of relocation costs. Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 D.2.g. The ordinance required the park owner to “take steps to mitigate the adverse impact on the tenants, not to exceed the reasonable costs of relocation.” Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 D.3. Under the original ordinance, if a tenant elected not to relocate upon conversion, the park owner was required to purchase the mobile home at 15% above its in-place market value. Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 D.3.a. The City Council later amended the ordinance to allow tenants to waive the protection of the closure conversion provisions and to allow the park owner and the tenants to agree to a mutually satisfactory relocation plan. Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 D.3., as amended, August 24, 1992. Under both the original and the amended rent control ordinance, however, the park owner may not close the park or convert it to a different use without first obtaining approval from an advisory agency6 and the City Council. Rent Control 94 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 8 Ordinance § 6723 C.3. Both the original and the amended rent control ordinances grant the advisory agency discretion to impose “such conditions as it finds necessary to mitigate the adverse impacts on the residents,” up to the reasonable costs of relocation. Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 F. The park owner may appeal the advisory agency's decision to the City Council.

Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 G.

6. Pass–Throughs—The rent control ordinance allows two kinds of costs to be passed through from the park owner to the tenants. First, the park owner can require tenants to reimburse the park owner for out-of-pocket costs of providing government-required services not compensated by other sources upon sixty days written notice. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 D.1. The rent control ordinance, however, excludes “predictable expenses for operation” from the definition of government-required services. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 D.1.b. The rent control ordinance also allows the park owner to pass through the costs of any capital improvement to the tenants, so long as the improvement has a useful life of at least five years, is permanently affixed, and is approved by at least two-thirds of the tenants. Rent Control Ordinance § 6701 D.1.e & § 6708 D.2., as amended, September 16, *1483 1992. The rent control ordinance as originally enacted allowed the park owner to pass through the cost of capital improvements upon approval by 50% of the tenants, but the City Council amended the ordinance to increase the approval ratio requirement to two-thirds.

7. Adjustments to Assure a Fair and Reasonable Return—The rent control ordinance establishes the Malibu Mobile Home Park Rent Stabilization Commission (“the Commission”). Rent Control Ordinance § 6703 A. The Commission is comprised of five residents of the City, none of whom may have been either park owners or park residents within the five years preceding their appointment. Id. The members of the Commission must be appointed by a four-fifths majority of the City Council, but “shall serve at the pleasure of the City Council.” Id. A park owner is entitled to apply to the Commission for an adjustment to one, some, or all of the spaces in the mobile home park “in order to establish the maximum allowable rent or to achieve a fair and reasonable return.” Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 C.

In evaluating a request for a rent increase, the Commission is directed to consider all relevant factors including operation costs, utility rates, property tax changes, insurance, advertising, variable mortgage rates, governmental assessments and fees, incidental services, employee costs, normal repair and maintenance, capital improvements, upgrading or addition of amenities, and the level of rent necessary to permit a just and reasonable return on the property. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 A. Although the Commission is directed to consider a broad range of factors, its implementation of any rent increase is severely limited by other substantive provisions of the rent control ordinance. For example, although the Commission is directed to consider the costs of capital improvements, it cannot implement an increase based on capital improvement expenses unless the park owner has complied with the capital improvement requirements of the ordinance's pass-through provisions. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 D.2.

The Commission is also severely restricted in adjusting base rent. Under the rent control ordinance, the base rent for monthto-month spaces is the rent charged on December 31, 1984 as adjusted according to the terms of the Los Angeles County Rent Control Ordinance until the effective date of the Malibu Rent Control Ordinance, and the base rate for long term leases is the rent charged at the time the lease expires. Rent Control Ordinance § 6701 B. Under the rent control ordinance, it is presumed that the base rent is a fair and reasonable return, and that presumption can be rebutted only by a showing by the park owner that its operating expenses were unusually high or low in the base year as compared to other years. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 C.1. The Commission is directed to consider only the following factors: (1) if the park owner made substantial capital improvements in 1991, which were not reflected in the rent levels on the base date; (2) substantial repairs were made due to damage caused by natural disaster or vandalism; (3) maintenance and repair was below accepted standards; or (4) other expenses were unreasonably high or low notwithstanding the following of prudent business practices. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 C.1.a–d. The Commission is also allowed by the rent control ordinance to consider whether the rent on the base date was disproportionate because of variations in rent over the term of a lease, seasonal variations in rent, or an anomaly created by a special premium charged or rebate given. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 C.2. The rent control ordinance does not allow the Commission to consider other factors in the determination of base rent. 95 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 9 B. The Zoning Ordinance
In February of 1993, after the rent control ordinance was amended, the City enacted an interim zoning ordinance (“the zoning ordinance”) which is set forth in Article IX, Chapter 9100, et seq. of the Malibu Municipal Code. Following the City's adoption of the zoning ordinance, the Court granted the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaints to allege the adoption and impact of the zoning ordinance on the plaintiffs' property. Each plaintiff did so. Nevertheless, the Court analyzes the zoning ordinance only for the purpose *1484 of ascertaining its effect when taken together with the rent control ordinance. The constitutionality of the zoning ordinance itself is not before the Court.

The zoning ordinance establishes a mobile home zone within the City, the boundaries of which “shall be the area developed for mobile home park use and existing on March 28, 1991, including all leachfields servicing the park.” Zoning Ordinance § 9201. None of the other designations established by the zoning ordinance accommodate mobile home use. Consequently, the zoning ordinance effectively prohibits the operation of any mobile home park within the City except for the two existing parks.

The zoning ordinance limits the permitted uses within the mobile home zone to: (a) “[a]ny mobilehome park and associated facilities in existence as of March 28, 1991”; and (b) “[t]he keeping of domestic animals.” Zoning Ordinance § 9241. The zoning ordinance allows four conditionally permitted uses within the mobile home zone. They are: (a) uses and structures associated with the operation of a mobile home park; (b) modifications to the number, layout or density of mobile home spaces within an existing mobile home park; (c) modifications of roads, landscaping, parking areas, etc.; and (d) the operation of a recreational vehicle park. Zoning Ordinance § 9242.

The zoning ordinance forbids the use of land in any manner other than that permitted by the zone in which the land is located.

Zoning Ordinance § 9110. Moreover, although the zoning ordinance establishes a variance procedure, a variance “shall not be granted ... which authorizes a use or activity which is not otherwise expressly authorized by the zoning regulations governing that parcel of property.” Zoning Ordinance § 9460. As a consequence of the restriction of permissible uses within the mobile home zone to those associated with the operation of a mobile home park, a park owner cannot convert a park to a different use without an application to the City Council for an amendment to the zoning map. Because the zoning ordinance does not allow mobile home park use in any other zone, a landowner who desires to establish a new park within the City would be barred from doing so unless he were able to convince the City Council to amend the ordinance.

C. The Regulatory Scheme as a Whole
[1] The rent control ordinance and the zoning ordinance combine to create the regulatory scheme challenged by the plaintiffs.

Therefore the Court must examine not only the individual elements of this regulatory scheme, but also the regulatory scheme as a whole. This is necessary because even if each element standing alone would be constitutional, the scheme must fall if, taken as a whole, it exceeds constitutional bounds.

As a starting point, there can be no doubt that the regulatory scheme is weighted heavily against the park owners. The rent control ordinance limits the owners' return on the parks both now and in the future, and the record shows that the requirements to obtain an increase in revenue are exceedingly difficult for a park owner to meet. Further, the rent control ordinance taken together with the zoning ordinance makes it virtually impossible for the park owners to change the use of the park property. Consequently, the park owners are left with a choice of operating the park indefinitely for a low return or attempting to run the extremely tight and costly administrative gauntlet required to change the use of the property. Given the views expressed by the City, such an attempt would clearly be futile.

Each of the plaintiffs has brought a summary judgment motion seeking a declaration that the rent control ordinance in conjunction with the zoning ordinance effects a physical taking of the plaintiffs' property. The City has brought summary judgment motions against each plaintiff seeking a determination that the rent control ordinance is constitutional. To resolve 96 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 10 these motions, the Court held a hearing limited solely to the issue of whether the ordinance substantially advances a legitimate purpose. The resolution of the other issues presented did not require the presentation of evidence.

II. CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS
A. Substantive Due Process
[2] The plaintiffs challenge the rent control ordinance as a substantive violation of *1485 the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A substantive due process challenge to an economic regulation must satisfy a two-part test: (1) does the ordinance serve a legitimate purpose, and (2) are the means employed rationally related to the legitimate purpose? Moore v. East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 498 n. 6, 97 S.Ct. 1932, 1935 n. 6, 52 L.Ed.2d 531 (1977). The Ninth Circuit has articulated the test as one which requires that the plaintiff “prove that the government's action was clearly arbitrary and unreasonable, having no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.” Sierra Lake Reserve v. City of Rocklin, 938 F.2d 951, 957 (9th Cir.1991), vacated and remanded, 506 U.S. 802, 113 S.Ct. 31, 121 L.Ed.2d 4 (1992), adhered to in relevant part, 987 F.2d 662 (9th Cir.1993); see also Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 S.Ct. 114, 71 L.Ed. 303 (1926); Moore, 431 U.S. at 498 n. 6, 97 S.Ct. at 1935 n. 6 (“Later cases [after Euclid ], have emphasized that the general welfare is not to be narrowly understood; it embraces a broad range of government purposes.”).
[3] Rent control is a form of price-control regulation. The standard for determining whether a state price control regulation is constitutional under the Due Process Clause is well established: Price control is unconstitutional only if arbitrary, discriminatory, or demonstrably irrelevant to a legitimate government purpose. Pennell v. City of San Jose, 485 U.S. 1, 11, 108 S.Ct. 849, 857, 99 L.Ed.2d 1 (1988). The government may intervene in response to a threat of monopoly pricing, or to remedy a discrepancy between supply and demand of a certain product, or to protect consumer welfare. Pennell, 485 U.S. at 11–13, 108 S.Ct. at 857–58. In particular, “states have broad power to regulate housing conditions in general and the landlord-tenant relationship in particular without paying compensation for all economic injuries that such regulation entails.” Id. at 12 n. 6, 108 S.Ct. at 857 n. 6.

In order to determine whether the rent control ordinance in whole or in part violates the Due Process Clause, consideration must first be given to whether the ordinance promotes any legitimate government purpose, and then to whether the ordinance is rationally related to that purpose.

1. Does the City have a legitimate government purpose?
The rent control ordinance itself states the following purposes:

Sec. 6700 Purpose of Provisions
A. When the County of Los Angeles adopted Chapter 8.57 of the Los Angeles County Code (Ordinance No. 87–0228) to regulate mobile home parks in the unincorporated areas of the County, the County found that there was within the County of Los Angeles a shortage of spaces for the location of mobilehomes. The area that is now the City of Malibu was previously part of the unincorporated area of the County and was subject to chapter 8.57 of the Los Angeles County Code.

The City of Malibu incorporated on March 28, 1991. There continues to be a shortage of mobilehome spaces in the area that is now the City of Malibu. Because of this shortage, there is a low vacancy rate and rents are presently rising and causing concern among a substantial number of mobilehome park residents. Because of the high cost of moving mobilehomes; the potential for damage resulting therefrom; the requirements relating to the installation of mobilehomes, including permits, landscaping and site preparation; the lack of alternative homesites for mobilehome residents; and the 97 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 11 substantial investment of homeowners in such homes, a virtual monopoly exists in the rental of mobilehome park spaces, creating a situation where park owners have unbridled discretion and ability to exploit mobilehome park residents and homeowners.

C. Additionally, because park space is virtually unavailable and relocating difficult and costly, the closure of a mobilehome park or its change of use has disastrous implications or results for homeowners, *1486 who may find it impossible to relocate to a comparable park.

D. For these reasons, among others, the City Council finds and declares it necessary to protect the owners and occupiers of mobilehomes from unreasonable rent increases, while at the same time recognizing the need of park owners to receive a fair return on their property. In addition, the City Council finds that it is necessary to provide for the preparation and approval of reports evaluating the impact of changes of use of the parks and provide for measures to mitigate the impact on residents of these changes of use.

Rent Control Ordinance § 6700 (emphasis added). In the legislative history of the rent control ordinance, the City has identified other purposes, for example:

Our purpose in the Ordinance is to provide the strictest rent stabilization possible and to keep the return of the park owners down to the absolute constitutional minimum. [Transcript of Proceedings before the City Council of Malibu, November 5, 1991, testimony of Asst. City Attorney Hogin, Record of Proceedings, at 399].

In addition, although not officially adopted as a purpose by the City Council, the argument runs throughout the legislative history that the ordinance was adopted to protect low income tenants of the parks. Perhaps the protection of low income tenants was not adopted as an official purpose due to a recognition by the City Council that the population of the parks is, in fact, wealthier than average. In this regard, the City Attorney's memorandum to the City Council states:

Malibu has two mobilehome parks: Point Dume and Paradise Cove. Both parks are upscale, first class mobilehome parks. Indeed, in certain respects, the demographics for the Malibu mobilehome parks is different than ordinarily found in mobilehome parks. The Malibu mobilehome parks enjoy a mix of retirees, younger professionals, and those who live elsewhere but maintain a mobilehome as a weekend or second home. Park residents are both longtime residents of the Malibu community and newcomers to the community. [Memorandum to City Council, October 17, 1991, Asst. City Attorney Hogin, Record of Proceedings, at 43] (emphasis added). Nonetheless, the City has continued to assert that the protection of low income tenants was a major purpose of the rent control ordinance.

Summarizing all of the City's contentions, the Court is able to identify four stated purposes for the ordinance. They are (1) to correct a monopoly-driven power disparity between the park owners and the tenants; (2) to protect the substantial investment that the tenants have made in their homes; (3) to protect low income tenants; and (4) to reduce the return of the park owners to the constitutional minimum. The Court finds that the second and third purposes are legitimate justifications for the City's rent control ordinance, but the first and fourth are not. [4] As to the alleged monopoly-driven power disparity, it is clear that if one existed at all, it would have to have been created by what the City claims is a shortage of mobile home spaces. Yet, the City did absolutely no independent investigation of whether a shortage of mobile home spaces actually existed in 1991, or whether, if it existed in Los Angeles, it also existed in 98 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 12 or had any effect on the Malibu area. Rather, the City uncritically adopted the findings of the Los Angeles County ordinance, an ordinance that applies not only to a much broader geographic area than Malibu, but also to all forms of rental housing.

Thus, the City's position is not based on actual facts, but instead on the notion that because other courts have accepted the monopoly argument in other contexts and other geographical areas, this Court is compelled to accept it as applied to mobile home housing in Malibu. See, e.g., Pennell, 485 U.S. at 12, 108 S.Ct. at 857–58 (accepting monopoly argument where plaintiffs did not dispute it); Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 17 Cal.3d 129, 160–64, 130 Cal.Rptr. 465, 488–91, 550 P.2d 1001, 1024–27 (1976) (holding that findings made by lower courts showed rational basis for monopoly argument in the specific context of apartment rentals in Alameda *1487 County).7 The difficulty with the City's position is that no matter what conditions exist elsewhere, this Court is not bound to find that those same conditions necessarily exist in Malibu. Although the existence of facts upon which the validity of an enactment depends is presumed, their non-existence can properly be established by proof. United States v. Carolene Products Co., 304 U.S. 144, 152–54, 58 S.Ct. 778, 783–85, 82 L.Ed. 1234 (1938); Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 130 Cal.Rptr. at 488, 550 P.2d at 1024. Accordingly, if the park owners show that the alleged shortage-driven monopoly does not exist in Malibu, this rationale cannot justify the rent control ordinance. Birkenfeld, 130 Cal.Rptr. at 488, 550 P.2d at 1024 (“[T]he constitutionality of residential rent controls under the police power depends upon the actual existence of a housing shortage and its concomitant ill effects of sufficient seriousness to make rent control a rational curative measure.”); also see Lockary v. Kayfetz, 917 F.2d 1150, 1155 (9th Cir.1990) (“Although a water moratorium may be rationally related to a legitimate state interest in controlling a water shortage, [the plaintiffs] have raised triable issues of fact surrounding the very existence of a water shortage.”). The record made at the Court's hearing on this issue leaves no doubt that the monopoly theory presented by the City is fundamentally flawed, and that any limited power disparity that might exist between the park owners and the tenants is not sufficient to justify a regulatory scheme as onerous as the one under review here.

In support of the contention that the shortage of mobile home spaces in Los Angeles County creates a situation in which the landlord has monopoly power to raise the tenants' rents in Malibu, the City points to a study of ocean-oriented mobile home parks which was prepared for Kissel in 1985. The study shows that there were very few vacancies in ocean-oriented mobile home parks in Los Angeles and Orange Counties during the period for which the study was performed. However, this study does nothing to prove the City's contention. A low vacancy rate does not warrant the conclusion that a monopoly exists because most transfers of tenancy are made without a “vacancy” ever occurring. Coaches are seldom moved. They are sold to the next tenant. Thus, the vacancies shown have little or no evidentiary value in determining this factual issue.

If coach sales are used as the determinant of housing availability, the picture is markedly different. A report prepared for the Point Dume Club shows that from the years 1986 to 1991, the yearly turnover rate never dropped below seven percent, and during 1989 actually reached eighteen percent. [Plaintiffs' Exhibit 8, at 60]. Thus, the actual data shows that in fact there was no housing shortage in the mobile home market. Furthermore, the studies relied upon by the City show that the rentals in both Malibu parks were priced below market.

Moreover, the City has not shown that the park owners possess any more of a monopoly than any other property owner has over the particular property it owns. In order to show that a park owner has a monopoly, the relevant market has to be defined so narrowly as to reach the point of absurdity. A mobile home is only one of a large variety of housing options available in Southern California and a number of mobile home parks exist throughout this area. Thus, whether the market is defined as housing or more narrowly as mobile home housing, the tenants have a number of options. Even if the Court were to limit the market to mobile home parks in Malibu, there are two competing parks. The City has made no allegation that the park owners are in collusion with one another to raise the rents in the parks. Indeed, *1488 the evidence shows that the rental rates are substantially lower at Paradise Cove than they are at Point Dume. Such a disparity suggests that the owners of the two parks are operating independently. It is only if the relevant market were to be defined as an individual park that a monopoly would exist. Since such a market definition would render every piece of rental property a monopoly, the Court does not find it viable.
99 Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 13 Nonetheless, the relative positions of the parties does, in a very limited way, put the landlord in a superior bargaining position. The mobile home tenant makes a substantial investment in the coach whether he buys the coach in place or purchases it prior to placement. Many mobile home park tenants also make substantial improvements to their spaces giving them an economic incentive to stay where they are. Moreover, like all tenants, many mobile home tenants have a noneconomic investment in remaining in place. Such non-economic factors include social relationships in the community, familiarity with the location, nearby employment, and a variety of other considerations. The Court accepts that a tenant may have both an economic and non-economic investment in remaining in place and that this investment may place the park owner in a somewhat superior bargaining position to that of the tenant. This superior bargaining position, however, is not created by any monopoly held by the park owners, but instead by the unprotected nature of the tenants' investment.

Accordingly, it supports the City's second stated purpose, not its first.

As a final point with respect to the issue of the monopoly allegedly created by the shortage of space, it is evident that if a shortage existed before, the City, by enacting the zoning ordinance, has taken steps to make it worse and to make it permanent. The zoning ordinance forbids the creation of any new mobile home parks within the City, effectively locking in for the foreseeable future whatever shortage now exists. [5] The second purpose identified by the City is to protect the investment that the tenants make in their mobile homes.

Although the park owners agree that the tenants do make an investment in their homes, they dispute that that investment needs protection, pointing to the escalating prices that the tenants have been receiving upon the sale of their coaches. The evidence is uncontroverted that sales prices for coaches in the parks consistently increased during the years prior to the imposition of rent control. Nevertheless, if the City reasonably determined that the possibility existed that the tenants' investments were threatened, it might be justified in taking steps to protect them. Pennell, 485 U.S. at 12–13, 108 S.Ct. at 857–58 (holding that the government may intervene in the marketplace to protect consumer welfare).

The dynamic relationship between the sales price of the coach and the amount of the rent suggests that the City's second stated purpose is not only its central one, but is in reality its only one. From the standpoint of a prospective buyer with a set amount of money to pay for a coach, the lower the rent he must pay, the more money he will have left over to dedicate to the mortgage on the coach. Accordingly, as the rent goes down, the sales price for the coach invariably goes up because the buyer is willing to pay more to the coach owner in consideration of the improvements as well as the low rent. In Malibu, this effect is demonstrated by higher sales prices for coaches at Paradise Cove, which has lower rents, than at Point Dume, even though Point Dume has superior amenities.

However, to speak of the transfer of tenancy as simply a sale of the coach is a mischaracterization. In fact, what the departing tenant sells and what the incoming tenant buys is a package consisting of the coach, the improvements put in place by previous tenants and that element of value inherent in the location of the coach (“placement value”) which is possessed by the departing tenant.8 The placement value is affected by view, amenities, the overall desirability of the area in which the coach is located, market rates *1489 for surrounding property, and a variety of other elements. This element of value is roughly equal to the amount of the purchase price in excess of the value of the coach and the improvements.

The coach and the improvements are depreciating properties. Thus, in Malibu, where prices for coaches in place have only escalated, the placement value makes up a substantial, if not the dominant, element of the purchase price of a coach upon a change in tenancy.

The park owner also realizes a portion of the placement value through the rent and upon selling the land. The more desirable the location of a coach, the more a prospective tenant would be willing to pay to live there. Thus, theoretically, if the park owner places the rent at a level high enough that the tenant can realize upon the transfer of his tenancy only the depreciated value of the coach and the improvements, the park owner would receive all the placement value. If the rent is set below that level, the tenant, correspondingly, receives a portion of the placement value which is realized upon the transfer of that 100
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 14 tenant's tenancy. Accordingly, rent control in the mobile home market effects an adjustment of the allocation of placement value.9 Whether the City has the power to adjust this shared allocation of placement value is the central question in this case and resolution turns on how the economic relationship between the park owners and the tenants is viewed.

The City argues that the return the tenant receives upon the sale of the coach is a legitimate investment based return. Thus, the City views placement value as an item of property shared by the park owners and the tenants. Indeed, the escalating sales prices in the Malibu parks evidence that, historically, the park owner and the tenants have shared the placement value.

In contrast, the park owners argue that the tenants own nothing but the coach, which is a depreciating property, and that any placement value, because it arises from the location of the park owner's real property, belongs solely to the park owner. Any value received by the departing tenant, beyond the depreciated value of the coach and the improvements, according to the park owners, rightfully belongs to the park owners. The park owners' position, in effect, is that placement value is a distinct item of property, no portion of which has ever been transferred to the tenants. The park owners' realization of this placement value is reflected in the rent charged for the space, and as the value increases, the rent must be increased to capture this value.

The park owners' position, taken to its logical conclusion, is that they must have an unrestricted right to increase rent, or they lose this “right” to placement value. Under this argument, rent control transfers this item of property to the tenants and is therefore unconstitutional.

The problem with the park owners' position is that placement value has always been shared between the park owners and the tenants. Accordingly, rent control is more properly viewed as an allocation of shared value rather than as a transfer of rights.

It is clear that most, or even all, of the tenants have invested more than the value of the coach itself to move into the park.

New tenants have paid for placement value held by previous tenants. Therefore, the tenants have an expectation that they will be able to substantially recoup that investment upon the sale of the coach. While that expectation may not be altogether wise, it is not unreasonable. The park owners are business people who understand that the operation of a mobile home park involves an economic relationship in which both the park owner and the tenant must make a substantial investment. Indeed, they have encouraged the tenants to make the investment and to expect a return on it.

The park owners point out that the primary beneficiaries of the placement value *1490 transferred by the ordinance are the tenants in place at the time the ordinance is enacted. Subsequent tenants pay a premium to current tenants for that value and receive the benefits of potential increases in placement value only to the extent that it exceeds the rent increases allowed under the ordinance. However, this one-time benefit to the current tenants is purely incidental, and except in the case of the rollback provisions, does not give the current tenants any more of the placement value than they already had before the ordinance was enacted. If the tenants do receive an increase in value, it arises from a reduction of risk, which is an unavoidable consequence of any effective strategy to achieve the City's investment protection purpose.

Without regulation, the park owners do have the power to seriously diminish the value of the tenants' investments by imposing arbitrary increases in rent. This might not be true if the market were perfect and the park owners were perfectly rational. However, there is no perfect market, and the perfectly rational economic actor is nothing more than a theoretical construct. While the evidence does not support the total market failure argued by the City, the Court must conclude that protection of the tenants' investment to some degree is a legitimate interest of the City. Pennell, 485 U.S. at 13, 108 S.Ct. at 858. Were the situation one in which the park owners and the tenants had not historically shared this value, the park owners' argument might be more convincing. However, in light of the substantial history of shared value in the Malibu parks, the Court must conclude that the rent control ordinance has the effect of adjusting value rather than transferring rights. [6] The City's third stated purpose is to protect low-income tenants. The parties dispute the number of low-income tenants in the plaintiffs' parks, but both the plaintiffs and the City admit that the mobile home park population is wealthier than the average such population. The evidence presented does show, however, that there are some low and fixed income residents in the plaintiffs' parks. Because there are some tenants in the parks with low or fixed incomes, the City has a legitimate interest in protecting them. The incidental benefit to wealthier tenants does not invalidate that purpose. 101
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 15 [7] The final purpose expressly identified by the City is to reduce the return of the park owners to the constitutional minimum. An ordinance that effects a transfer of wealth is not per se unconstitutional. Yee v. City of Escondido, 503 U.S. 519, ––––, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 1529, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992). However, absent some other justification, the City does not have a legitimate government interest in effecting such a transfer. While the constitution allows the government to enact regulations that have an adverse effect on the income of particular citizens if the regulations promote a legitimate government interest, the reduction of the park owners' income is not, of itself, a legitimate government interest.

2. Is the Rent Control Ordinance Rationally Related to any Legitimate Purpose? Constitutional analysis of the ordinance also requires that the Court determine whether the rent control ordinance is rationally related to the two legitimate purposes identified above. Here also, the Court must analyze not only the constitutionality of the individual elements of the rent control ordinance, but also of the regulatory scheme created by the rent control ordinance and the zoning ordinance.
a. Rent increase limits
[8] The City has a legitimate interest in protecting the tenants' investments in the coaches, improvements, and location. These investments could be substantially eroded by arbitrary rent increases imposed by the park owners. The rent increase limit protects the tenants' investment by limiting the landlord's power to force the tenant out of the park by increasing the tenant's rent to a level which he can no longer pay. The provision also operates to stabilize the resale value of the tenant's coach by reducing uncertainty regarding the amount of rent necessary to remain as a tenant over a long period of time. The rent increase limits also operate to protect low and fixed income tenants. *1491 b. Rent rollback
[9] Rent rollbacks and rent freezes have generally been upheld if they counteract rent increases imposed by landlords in anticipation of rent control. See, e.g., Birkenfeld v. City of Berkeley, 17 Cal.3d 129, 130 Cal.Rptr. 465, 491–94, 550 P.2d 1001, 1027–30 (1976). It is indisputable that the eight year rollback imposed by the Malibu ordinance does not serve that purpose. During the first six years of that period, Paradise Cove was subject to the Los Angeles County rent control ordinance. Although Point Dume was exempt from that ordinance, the rent rollback is largely inapplicable to Point Dume because most of its tenants were under long term leases. During that six year period, the park owners could not possibly have anticipated the enactment of a rent control ordinance because the City had not yet been incorporated. During the final two years, the parks were subject to the City's rent moratorium. Consequently, they could not have raised the rents in the parks in anticipation of the ordinance.

In fact, the legislative record of the City's ordinance presents persuasive evidence that the rent rollback was motivated by the City's desire to punish Kissel for what it perceived to be violations of the Los Angeles County ordinance prior to the City's incorporation. [Transcript, City Council Meeting, February 25, 1992, Legislative Record, at 331–405].

The City argues that it was rational to roll the rents back to 1984 levels to adjust for any excessive increases in the period when the Los Angeles County ordinance was in effect. However, the City Council made no inquiry into whether there had actually been any excessive rent increases prior to the imposition of the rent moratorium. The City relied solely on evidence that some residents of Paradise Cove had complained to Los Angeles County about rent increases. The County had not investigated the claims, so the City had no basis to conclude that they were valid. Indeed, more than one hundred residents of Paradise Cove opposed the rollback because they believed that their rents were not excessive. 102
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 16 Neither does the evidence support the conclusion that the rollback was needed to protect the tenants' investments against any action by the park owners. The evidence is uncontroverted that the tenants were selling their coaches at substantial premiums throughout the period subject to the rollback. Although the City may enact controls in order to protect the tenants against future increases that could threaten their investment, it cannot decrease rents with absolutely no evidence that rents had ever been increased to arbitrary levels.10 Likewise, the rollback does not affect any power disparity that exists between the park owners and the tenants. If there is a power disparity, it is the park owners' power to raise the rent that creates the disparity, not the amount of the rent itself. The eight year rollback provision is wholly arbitrary and punitive, and is therefore violative of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
c. Rent freeze until March 28, 1993 and following long-term leases [10] Like the rent rollback, the three year moratorium imposed by the rent control ordinance at the end of long term leases and the freeze on increases until March 1993 are violative of the Due Process Clause because they do not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate purposes for which the ordinance was enacted. Once again, the City had no evidence of arbitrary rent increases and did no market study. Furthermore, the freezes, like the rollback, do not advance the legitimate interests which the City claims it had for enacting the ordinance. Also, like the rollback, the rent freeze on long term leases was at least partially motivated by a desire to remedy increases made under Point Dume leases allegedly entered into by tenants as a result of coercion by Adamson. [Transcript, City Council Meeting, February 25, 1992, Legislative Record, at 331–405].

However, the City had no evidence that there was coercion or that the rents in the parks were actually excessive. Therefore, although it was permissible for it to regulate potential increases in order to prevent the rents from *1492 becoming excessive, the City had no justification to freeze rents at current levels for substantial periods without evidence that they were in fact excessive.

Moreover, because the rent moratoriums last for a significant period of time with no reasonable adjustment mechanism, they cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny. Although the ordinance theoretically allows the park owner to escape the moratoriums by applying for a rent increase, to obtain such an increase the park owner would have to show that the park, as a whole, was not affording it a reasonable return on its investment. The rent control ordinance permits a park owner to apply for an increase on one, some or all of the spaces within the park, but it allows an adjustment from the base rate only if the park owner can show that the park owner's operating, maintenance or other expenses were unusually high or low in the base year. Rent Control Ordinance § 6708 C. & 6712 C.11 For a space that was previously subject to a long term lease, the base rate is the rent at the time the lease expires. Rent Control Ordinance § 6701 B. For a space not subject to a long term lease, the base rate is the rent charged on December 31, 1984 as adjusted according to the terms of the Los Angeles County ordinance until the effective date of the rent control ordinance. Rent Control Ordinance § 6701 B. Consequently, the freeze provisions apply to the base rate itself. Under the ordinance, the base rent is presumed to provide a fair and reasonable return.

Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 B. That presumption can only be rebutted by a showing that the park, as a whole, was subject to unusually high or low expenses. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712 C. As a result, the park owner is effectively disabled from obtaining an increase after the termination of a lease barring some kind of park-wide crisis.

Since both the two year moratorium following the passage of the rent control ordinance and the three year freeze following the termination of the lease leave the park owner without a remedy should it be denied a fair return on its investment, both violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. See Birkenfeld, 130 Cal.Rptr. at 494, 550 P.2d at 1030 (“For such rent ceilings of infinite duration an adjustment mechanism is constitutionally necessary to provide for changes in circumstances and also provide for the previously mentioned situations in which the base rent cannot reasonably be deemed to reflect general market conditions.”).
103
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 17 d. Rent moratorium while the City considered the rent control ordinance [11] Conversely, the three year rent moratorium applied by the City Council while it was considering the rent control ordinance is presumptively valid. That moratorium could have achieved the legitimate purpose of limiting increases in reaction to the possibility of impending rent control. The Court notes, however, that the City does not have the power to continue the moratorium indefinitely. A time must come when a moratorium has lasted so long as to violate due process. e. Vacancy control
[12] The dispute regarding the characterization of the relationship between the mobile home tenant and the park owner becomes most sharply focused in the area of vacancy control. In enacting the vacancy control provision of the ordinance, the City has in effect allocated a large part of the placement value of the coach to the tenant rather than to the park owner, thus raising serious constitutional questions. As discussed above, the park owners argue that any placement value arises from the value of the land and consequently belongs entirely to them. The City argues that the placement value is a legitimate part of the package sold to the tenants by the park owner when the park owner offers the space. The reality is somewhere between the two approaches.

Both the plaintiffs and the City argue from the assumption that each tenant buys a coach, finds a vacant space and places a coach in the space. The evidence clearly *1493 shows that that rarely happens, and that if it happens at all, it does not happen in the Malibu parks.12 What actually happens is that the tenant buys an existing coach in place in a particular park and pays the departing tenant a premium over the depreciated value of the coach. That payment of a premium for the placement value of the coach predated rent control. Thus, the park owners contemplated from the outset that the tenants would receive some return for the placement value of the coach. Because in almost every case the tenant has himself paid a placement premium as part of his own original investment, the tenant suffers economic injury if the park owner increases the rent to a level that seriously diminishes the tenant's investment or eliminates it altogether.

As stated above, the park owners argue that the tenants should have known when they entered the relationship that their investment was at risk and that the City is not justified in helping them avoid a risk they voluntarily assumed. This caveat emptor argument is not compelling. Regardless of the wisdom of the tenants' decisions to live in the parks, the City has the power to legislate to protect the tenants' investments. Without vacancy control, the park owner could force existing tenants to sell the coach-in-place at “distress-sale prices.” Azul Pacifico, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 948 F.2d 575, 583 (9th Cir.1991), op. withdrawn, on reh'g appeal dismissed, 973 F.2d 704 (9th Cir.1992). By enacting the vacancy control provision, the City favored the tenants' share of the placement value over the park owners'. However, it is within the City's power to adjust the balance of competing investment backed expectations for the purpose of protecting consumer welfare, and in doing so, it may make a choice which favors the tenants' investment over that of the park owners. The vacancy control provision of the rent control ordinance does not, by itself, violate substantive due process. f. Closure/Conversion restrictions
[13] In their present form, the closure conversion restrictions require that a park owner contemplating closing park property or converting it to another use prepare a report detailing the impact of the closure or conversion on the residents of the park. The report is submitted to the planning department, or another agency designated by the City Council, which then recommends mitigation measures. This procedure is rationally related to protecting the tenants' investments in their coaches and in their spaces and is not violative of the park owners' constitutional rights. 104
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 18 g. Pass-through and fair return provisions
[14] The ordinance states that its provisions are intended to assure that the park owners receive a fair return on their investment. The park owners have not submitted any evidence that the pass-through provisions do not advance that legitimate interest. The park owners argue that the pass-throughs merely maintain the status quo by allowing the park owners to pass certain costs on to the tenants, and are not a method for increasing the rent. However, the fact that the pass-through provisions do not provide the park owners with a method for increasing the rent does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that they do not advance the purpose of assuring the park owners a reasonable return. The pass-through provisions of the ordinance do not violate due process.
[15] However, the park owners argue persuasively that the procedure adopted by the ordinance to adjust the base rate in order to assure a fair return is too restrictive. The ordinance allows the park owner to apply for a rent increase from base rent only if “[t]he park owner's operating and maintenance expenses in the base year were unusually high or low in comparison to other years,” or the rent on the base date was disproportionate because it was artificially high or low due to *1494 a lease provision, a seasonal variation, or some special circumstance. Rent Control Ordinance § 6712. The park owner is given no recourse for changes due to other economic conditions or occurrences during the eight year period between 1986 and the date the base rate took effect in 1992. The effect of this narrow procedure is that the park owner is not allowed to adjust the base rent to a level that provides it a reasonable return under all circumstances. Consequently, it violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.13
h. The regulatory scheme as a whole
[16] In addition to examining the individual elements of the rent control ordinance, the Court must analyze the overall effect of the rent control ordinance taken together with the zoning ordinance to determine whether the rent control ordinance is reasonably related to a legitimate purpose.

As stated, it cannot be disputed that the rent control ordinance severely limits the park owners' return on their property, and that it, in combination with the zoning ordinance, makes a change in the use of the park owners' property virtually impossible. Both ordinances require that a park owner obtain the approval of the City Council prior to changing the use of the property. That such an application would be futile is without question. The City Council has demonstrated its clear intention to favor the continued operation of the parks regardless of the impact upon the park owners. The question for the Court, then, is whether the City's requirement that the park owners continue to operate the parks for a return close to the constitutional minimum in perpetuity is arbitrary, discriminatory14, or demonstrably irrelevant to a legitimate government purpose.

Pennell, 485 U.S. at 11, 108 S.Ct. at 857.

In considering whether this onerous regulatory scheme is rationally related to the interests it is intended to promote, the Court cannot conclude that there is evidence of the kind of market failure that the City envisions. If there were, perhaps all of the burdens placed on the park owners would be justified. On the contrary however, the evidence shows that prior to the adoption of the ordinance, the tenants were selling their coaches in place for substantial and escalating premiums, that throughout the period prior to the adoption of the rent control ordinance, numerous coaches were sold, and that the rents in the parks were actually below market rates for comparable ocean-side parks. Accordingly, although some of the interests advanced by the rent control ordinance may be legitimate, the Court is hard pressed to find that a regulatory scheme that so severely interferes with the park owners' economic rights is rationally related to those interests.

Under the regulatory scheme, the park owners are effectively denied any opportunity to change the use of their land.

Although the City has written the ordinance in a way that shields this aspect of it from facial challenge, it is clear to the Court that a change of use is not a viable option for the park owners. The park owner must first prepare a report, submit it to a committee and agree to provide whatever mitigation measures the committee recommends. Then, the park owner must obtain 105
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 19 the consent of the City Council to close the park. Then, even if the City Council were to agree to the closure, the zoning ordinance would deny the park owner any change of use without further consent by the City Council.

Because there is virtually no evidence that the park owners were abusing any power that they have over the tenants, it is difficult to conceive of any reason for the enactment of such an onerous ordinance other than a desire to please the current tenants of the parks, a large and very vocal voting constituency *1495 in the City. These current tenants, of course, stand to benefit from the ordinance in the form of higher sales prices for their coaches.15 [17] However, the Court is required to give deference to the City Council's determination of the appropriate way to protect the tenants' investments. The Court may not invalidate the ordinance based on a suggestion of an improper motivation on the part of the City Council when a proper motivation is also presented. United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367, 383, 88 S.Ct. 1673, 1682, 20 L.Ed.2d 672 (1968) (“It is a familiar principle of constitutional law that this Court will not strike down an otherwise constitutional statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.”). Likewise, the Court is not permitted to speculate as to the future actions of the City Council should the park owners later desire to close the parks. Because the City Council could rationally have found that the ordinance strikes an appropriate balance between the investment expectations of the tenants and those of the park owners, the Court finds that, with the exceptions noted, the regulatory scheme established by the rent control ordinance and the zoning ordinance does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

B. Equal Protection
[18] The plaintiffs assert that the rent control ordinance denies them their rights under the equal protection clause. Most laws distinguish in some fashion between classes of persons, and the equal protection clause does not forbid classifications.

Nordlinger v. Hahn, 505 U.S. 1, ––––, 112 S.Ct. 2326, 2331, 120 L.Ed.2d 1 (1992). Rather, the clause “keeps governmental decisionmakers from treating differently persons who are in all relevant respects alike.” Id. As a general rule, “legislatures are presumed to have acted within their constitutional power despite the fact that, in practice, their laws result in some inequality.” Mc Gowan v. Maryland, 366 U.S. 420, 425–26, 81 S.Ct. 1101, 1105, 6 L.Ed.2d 393 (1961). Accordingly, unless a classification warrants some sort of heightened review because it jeopardizes the exercise of a fundamental right or categorizes on the basis of an inherently suspect characteristic, the equal protection clause requires only that the classification rationally further a legitimate government interest. Nordlinger, 505 U.S. at –––– – ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 2331–32. [19] Although the plaintiffs do not identify precisely what classification made by the ordinance they claim violates the equal protection clause, the Court assumes that they challenge the City's choice to apply controls only to mobile home rentals rather than to all residential rentals. Since such a classification does not involve any suspect category, the Court reviews it for rational relation to a legitimate interest. Nordlinger, 505 U.S. at –––– – ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 2331–32.

Were the ordinance only intended to protect low income residents, it would present severe concerns under the equal protection clause. First, it would arguably be overbroad because it protects a substantial number of wealthy park tenants in order to protect only a few low income tenants. It would also arguably be unconstitutionally underinclusive because it fails to protect low income apartment dwellers. The ordinance is saved, however, because one of the explicit interests advanced by the enactment of the rent control ordinance is the protection of the investments made by the tenants. Because other residential tenants do not make an investment of the kind involved in a mobile home, the City must be found to have acted rationally when it chose to apply rent control only to mobile home tenancies.

C. Taking Without Just Compensation
[20] The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution requires that private property not be taken for public use without just compensation. *1496 United States Constitution, Amend. 5. 16 Most of the cases interpreting the Takings Clause fall 106
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 20 within two distinct categories. Yee v. City Of Escondido Cal., 503 U.S. 519, ––––, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 1526, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992). Where the government authorizes a physical occupation of property, or actually takes title, the Takings Clause generally requires compensation. Id. Alternately, where the government merely regulates the use of property, compensation is required only if considerations such as the purpose of the regulation or the extent to which it deprives the owner of the economic use of the property suggest that the regulation has unfairly singled out the property owner to bear a burden that should be borne by the public as a whole. Id. The plaintiffs argue that the rent control ordinance taken together with the zoning ordinance effects a taking under both theories.

The plaintiffs do not challenge the ordinances as they apply to their particular property and circumstances, but rather mount a facial challenge to the ordinances. They argue that the ordinances constitute a taking however they might be applied. Before reaching the merits of this claim, the Court first must confront the City's argument that the plaintiffs' facial takings claims are not ripe for adjudication.

1. Ripeness
[21] The City takes the position that the plaintiffs' takings claims are not ripe for adjudication because plaintiffs have not pursued all available state remedies to secure just compensation. Plaintiffs respond that although a challenge to a particular application of an otherwise constitutional statute might not be ripe, their facial challenge to the ordinance presents a controversy ripe for adjudication.

The Supreme Court has held that before a property owner can make a challenge to the application of an ordinance, he must exhaust both administrative remedies under the applicable ordinance and any remedy provided in the state courts that could lead to the provision of just compensation. Williamson County Regional Planning Comm'n v. Hamilton Bank, 473 U.S. 172, 194, 105 S.Ct. 3108, 3120–21, 87 L.Ed.2d 126 (1985). The Supreme Court addressed the ripeness requirement for a facial taking in Yee v. City of Escondido, Cal., 503 U.S. 519, ––––, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 1532, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992). In Yee, the Court held:

While respondent is correct that a claim that the ordinance effects a regulatory taking as applied to petitioners property would be unripe ..., petitioners mount a facial challenge to the ordinance. They allege in this Court that the ordinance does not ‘substantially advance a legitimate state interest’ no matter how it is applied. As this allegation does not depend on the extent to which petitioners are deprived of the economic use of their particular pieces of property or the extent to which these particular petitioners are compensated, petitioners' facial challenge is ripe.

Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1532 (emphasis in the original and citations omitted).

Moreover, the Supreme Court has reached the merits of facial takings claims on numerous occasions without questioning ripeness. See, e.g., Keystone Bituminous Coal Ass'n v. DeBenedictis, 480 U.S. 470, 107 S.Ct. 1232, 94 L.Ed.2d 472 (1987) (upholding Pennsylvania statute forbidding coal mining that causes subsidence to pre-existing structures); *1497 Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., 458 U.S. 419, 102 S.Ct. 3164, 73 L.Ed.2d 868 (1982) (holding the installation of CATV facilities on plaintiff's property to be a physical taking); Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining and Reclamation Ass'n, Inc., 452 U.S. 264, 101 S.Ct. 2352, 69 L.Ed.2d 1 (1981) (denying facial challenge to the Surface Mining Act); Agins v. City of Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255, 100 S.Ct. 2138, 65 L.Ed.2d 106 (1980) (upholding zoning ordinance against facial challenge).

In Hodel, the Supreme Court first held that § 522(e) of the Surface Mining Act was not a facial taking, and then went on to hold that because the plaintiffs had failed to identify any particular property that had been taken under the Act, an “as applied” challenge was not yet ripe:
107
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 21 Although we conclude that ‘mere enactment’ of the Act did not effect a taking of private property, this holding does not preclude appellees or other coal mine operators from attempting to show that as applied to other parcels of land, the Act and the Secretary's regulations effect a taking.

Hodel, 452 U.S. at 297 n. 40, 101 S.Ct. at 2371 n. 40.

In Keystone, the Supreme Court stated:

The posture of this case is critical because we have recognized an important distinction between a claim that the mere enactment of a statute constitutes a taking and a claim that the particular impact of government action on a specific piece of property requires the payment of just compensation.

Keystone, 480 U.S. at 494, 107 S.Ct. at 1246. Although the Supreme Court recited a long passage from Hodel emphasizing the necessity for a concrete controversy before a takings claim could be examined, it nonetheless went on to decide that there had been no facial taking. Keystone, 480 U.S. at 501–02, 107 S.Ct. at 1250–51.

Clearly, the Supreme Court contemplates that a facial takings challenge can be adjudicated prior to the exhaustion of all state remedies provided that a concrete controversy exists between the parties. See, e.g., Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council, 505 U.S. 1003, –––– n. 4, 112 S.Ct. 2886, 2907 n. 4, 120 L.Ed.2d 798 (1992) (Blackmun J. dissenting) (“Facial challenges are ripe when the act is passed; applied challenges require a final decision on the act's application to the property in question.”). Moreover, the discussion of the issue in Yee suggests strongly, in a factual situation nearly identical to the present case, that a facial challenge such as the one involved here is ripe for adjudication.

The City attempts to distinguish the ripeness discussion in Yee, arguing that because Yee came to the Supreme Court from the California state courts, the Supreme Court could decide whether there was a taking while remanding the issue of just compensation to be decided by the state courts. This Court finds that while Yee did follow a different procedural path than the present cases, the Supreme Court's discussion of ripeness in Yee is nonetheless useful to demonstrate that the Supreme Court continues to require a lower standard for the ripeness inquiry for facial challenges.

The City further argues that the Ninth Circuit requires the Williamson test to be satisfied for both as applied and facial takings challenges. The Ninth Circuit's construction of Williamson is not entirely clear. In Lake Nacimiento Ranch Co. v. San Luis Obispo Cty., 841 F.2d 872 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 827, 109 S.Ct. 79, 102 L.Ed.2d 55 (1988), the Ninth Circuit set out different standards for facial and “as applied” takings challenges. According to Lake Nacimiento, in order for an as applied challenge to be ripe, a plaintiff must establish two components: (1) that the regulation has gone so far that it has “taken” plaintiff's property; and (2) that any compensation tendered for such taking is not just. Lake Nacimiento, 841 F.2d at 877. However, Lake Nacimiento held that a facial challenge was ripe because it was brought on the basis that the mere enactment of the restriction constituted a taking. Lake Nacimiento, 841 F.2d at 877. [22] Later, the Ninth Circuit, although acknowledging that the Supreme Court has often decided facial takings claims without considering ripeness, decided that facial takings claims are not ripe “unless and until it is known what, if any, compensation is available.” Southern Pacific v. City of Los Angeles, *1498 922 F.2d 498, 505–06 (9th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 943, 112 S.Ct. 382, 116 L.Ed.2d 333 (1991). Southern Pacific, however, did not purport to require that all facial takings challenges must meet that test, but rather established an exception where “the court is simply considering whether a taking has occurred, not whether it is a taking without just compensation,” or where “no compensation would be sufficient to cure the constitutional infirmity.” Southern Pacific, 922 F.2d at 506–07 n. 11.

The City argues that Southern Pacific distinguishes the Supreme Court cases that reach the merits of facial takings claims in two ways. The first group of cases, according to Southern Pacific, were ripe despite no prior determination of just 108
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 22 compensation because they had come up from state courts and the Supreme Court could remand for a determination of just compensation. Southern Pacific, 922 F.2d at 506 (distinguishing Agins and Loretto ).17 The City's argument appears to be that Southern Pacific distinguishes the second group of cases, (Hodel and Keystone ), on the ground that, because the Supreme Court held that there had been no facial taking, it was not necessary to determine the amount of just compensation.

This argument is flawed because it distinguishes the ripeness determination based on the result on the merits. Although somewhat broader in scope than the strict limits of Article III case and controversy jurisdiction, ripeness is, at its base, a jurisdictional determination. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 14, 96 S.Ct. 612, 632, 46 L.Ed.2d 659 (1976). 18 Jurisdiction is a
threshold consideration which is not based on the outcome of the merits of the case. Likewise, the prudential elements of the ripeness doctrine cannot be based on a predisposition of the merits. Yet, the City's argument leads inexorably to the conclusion that the Court has jurisdiction if there has been no taking, but does not if there has been a taking. That interpretation of the holding in Southern Pacific is so at odds with the entire system of federal jurisdiction that it cannot be accepted here.

Rather, if interpreted narrowly, the holding of Southern Pacific can accommodate the Supreme Court's decisions in Hodel and Keystone. The facial takings issues in Hodel and Keystone were ripe for determination, not because the Court ultimately determined that there was no taking, but rather because the Supreme Court was presented with a sufficiently concrete factual setting in which to decide the question of what compensation would be appropriate.19 This Court interprets Southern Pacific, in accord with Supreme Court precedent, to hold that a facial challenge is ripe if to determine whether there is a taking would not require the Court to speculate regarding what property was taken by the regulation. “[T]he constitutionality of statutes ought not to be decided except in an actual factual setting that makes such a decision necessary.” *1499 Hodel, 452 U.S. at 294–95, 101 S.Ct. at 2370; Pennell v. San Jose, 485 U.S. 1, 10, 108 S.Ct. 849, 856–57, 99 L.Ed.2d 1 (1988).

Southern Pacific was a challenge to a zoning amendment that limited the uses to which the plaintiff's railroad right-of-way could be put. But, the plaintiff in Southern Pacific had never filed a meaningful development application. Consequently, the court had no means by which to determine how the plaintiff had intended to use the land. The claim was not ripe in Southern Pacific because the court could not determine, from the face of the ordinance, whether or not there had been a taking at all without resort to a specific record showing exactly what the plaintiff had been denied. In effect, what was presented to the court as a facial challenge to the ordinance could only be adjudicated “as applied.”20 Hodel, Keystone, and the present case are distinguishable because the regulation under attack, rather than denying the plaintiff a hypothetical use, puts a set of specific limitations on the plaintiffs' present use of their property. In Hodel and Keystone the challenged statutes denied the plaintiffs access to certain coal reserves that they owned. The Supreme Court decided that there had been no facial taking based on a complete understanding of what property rights the plaintiffs were alleging they had been deprived of by the statute. Likewise here, the challenged ordinance limits the return on the plaintiffs' present use of the property, and the Court is not left to speculate regarding the plaintiffs' intended use of it. Plaintiffs' facial takings claims are ripe for determination.21

2. Physical Taking
[23] [24] The government effects a physical taking only where it requires the landowner to submit to the physical occupation of its land. See, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1528. “This element of required acquiescence is at the heart of the concept of occupation.” FCC v. Florida Power Corp., 480 U.S. 245, 252, 107 S.Ct. 1107, 1112, 94 L.Ed.2d 282 (1987). In Yee, the Supreme Court held that a mobile home rent control ordinance viewed in conjunction with the California Mobile Home Residency Law was not a physical taking. Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1531. Yee overruled both a Ninth Circuit and a Third Circuit opinion holding that the vacancy control provisions of mobile home rent control statutes were physical takings. Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1527 (“We granted certiorari to resolve the conflict between the decision 109
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 23 below and those of two of the federal Courts of Appeals, in [ Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, 833 F.2d 1270 (9th Cir.1987) ] and Pinewood Estates of Michigan v. Barnegat Township Leveling Board, 898 F.2d 347 (3d Cir.1990).”)22.

The first argument advanced by the plaintiffs in Yee was that because the landlord cannot easily evict the tenant, the tenant receives what amounts to a perpetual right to occupy the landlord's property at below market rates. The Supreme Court held that there was no physical taking because “[p]etitioners voluntarily rented their land to mobile home owners.” Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1528. Responding to a similar argument in Florida Power Corp., the Supreme Court commented, “it is the invitation, not the rent, that makes the difference.” Florida Power Corp., 480 U.S. at 252, 107 S.Ct. at 1112.

Because the park owners invited the tenants onto their land, government regulation of the relationship between *1500 the park owners and the tenants does not rise to the level of a physical taking.

The next argument advanced by the challengers to the rent control statute in Yee was that the restrictions on rental rates are realized by the tenant as an increase in the sales price of the tenants' coach. This increase would theoretically be accompanied by a corresponding decrease in the value of the park owner's land. This is different, according to the plaintiffs, from an ordinary apartment rental because the tenant has a valuable commodity to sell at the end of the tenancy. The Supreme Court responded that although this effect is more pronounced in the mobile home situation because it is realized all at once, all rent control effects a similar transfer of wealth. Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1529. The Supreme Court held that “[t]he mobile home owner's ability to sell the mobile home at a premium may make this wealth transfer more visible than in the ordinary case, but the existence of the transfer in itself does not convert regulation into physical invasion.” Id. (citation omitted, emphasis in the original). Moreover, as discussed above, the rent control ordinance is not the source of the tenant's premium. Most tenants buy a coach in place with an initial investment that includes some premium for the location of the coach. Consequently, although the rent control ordinance increases the in-place value of the coach, it does not create the situation in which the tenant takes some of that value. Rather, that situation is part of the package that the park owner sells to the tenants in the park either with or without rent control. The ordinance, to the extent that it effects a transfer, transfers value, not rights.

Plaintiffs argue that, despite Yee, the rent control ordinance has effected a physical taking because when combined with the zoning ordinance, it requires park owners to continue to use their land as a mobile home park in perpetuity. Their contention is that the zoning ordinance allows for no use other than as a mobile home park, and because of the conditions imposed by the rent control ordinance, they would never be able to find a buyer for a mobile home park with such a limited return or for any other use. The plaintiffs seize on the following language in Yee:

A different case would be presented were the statute, on its face or as applied, to compel a landowner over objection to rent his property or to refrain in perpetuity from terminating the tenancy.

Yee, 503 U.S. at ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1529.

This argument is nearly identical to an argument made in Yee that “the statutory procedure for changing the use of a mobile home park is in practice ‘a kind of gauntlet,’ in that they are not in fact free to change the use of their land.” Yee, 503 U.S. at –––– – ––––, 112 S.Ct. at 1528–29. The only difference is that the plaintiffs here contend that the statutory gauntlet is even tighter. Nonetheless, however tight the gauntlet, “it is the invitation, not the rent, that makes the difference.” Florida Power Corp., 480 U.S. at 252, 107 S.Ct. at 1112. The plaintiffs have issued the invitation, and, consequently, they cannot claim that the ordinances effect a facial physical taking.

The plaintiffs refer the Court to a decision in the Northern District of California which held that restrictions on the closure or conversion to other uses of residential hotels in San Francisco which required substantial costs for relocation of tenants constituted a physical taking. Golden Gate Hotel Ass'n v. City and County of San Francisco, 1993 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 9232, modified, 836 F.Supp. 707 and, vacated on procedural grounds, 18 F.3d 1482 (9th Cir.1994). Golden Gate held that 110
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 24 the restrictions were physical takings because they had the effect of compelling the landlord to perpetually rent his property for a limited return. The court was disturbed by the fact that the ordinance in effect required the hotel owner to “pay a king's ransom in order to discontinue the use of his property as a residential hotel.” Id. at *15–16.

While the Court agrees that such a requirement raises a substantial takings question, it cannot agree with the Northern District's conclusion that the challenged ordinance effected a physical taking. A regulation that promotes the continuation of an existing use does not normally effect a physical taking, even if it makes it substantially *1501 more expensive to discontinue that use, because the property owner made the choice to use its property in the way prescribed by the regulation.

Many regulations make changing the way a landowner uses his property more costly. Every zoning ordinance does so.

Environmental laws, such as the National Environmental Protection Act, that require the preparation of reports and studies do so. The only difference, if any, between the ordinance at issue in Golden Gate and many other ordinances is the cost involved. That difference of degree, while it could support a finding that there was a regulatory taking, does not, in this Court's view, support a finding that there was a physical taking. The same reasoning applies to the rent control ordinance. [25] The rent control and zoning ordinances, as applied to plaintiffs, might effect a physical taking, but the Court declines to consider that challenge because it is not ripe. It is undisputed that the plaintiffs have not made a change of use proposal,23 nor have they requested any rent increases. They would have to do both as well as seek relief from the state courts prior to bringing an “as applied” challenge in the federal court. The plaintiffs argue that it would be futile to seek any redress from the City because the City has already indicated its intransigence, a conclusion with which the Court cannot disagree.

Nevertheless, even if it is a foregone conclusion that the City would reject any request by the plaintiffs for a rent increase or zoning change, the Court still declines to adjudicate any “as applied” challenge. On this record, without some concrete definition of the scope of an intended change of use or rent increase by the park owners, the Court has no issue which it could decide.

3. Regulatory Taking
[26] [27] [28] In a regulatory taking case involving local government, the question is whether a diminution of value or transfer of rights caused by the local government was the result of an action justified by the police power or instead was the result of an action that can be justified only by the power of eminent domain. See Agins v. Tiburon, 447 U.S. 255, 261, 100 S.Ct. 2138, 2141–42, 65 L.Ed.2d 106 (1980); Hall v. City of Santa Barbara, 833 F.2d 1270, 1280 (9th Cir.1986), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 940, 108 S.Ct. 1120, 99 L.Ed.2d 281 (1988), and overruled on other grounds, Yee v. City of Escondido, 503 U.S. 519, 112 S.Ct. 1522, 118 L.Ed.2d 153 (1992). Under the Fifth Amendment as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment, just compensation is required only if the local government action is not within the legitimate scope of the local government's power. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has developed a test in the regulatory takings field that emphasizes the relationship between the action causing the diminution or transfer and the purpose of that action. Thus, an ordinance effects a regulatory taking if the ordinance does not substantially advance legitimate state interests or if it denies an owner economically viable use of his land. Agins, 447 U.S. at 260, 100 S.Ct. at 2141. [29] In order to determine whether the regulation denies the owner an economically viable use of his land, the Court is required to conduct inquiries and make evaluations concerning the economic impact of the regulation on the specific property involved. Hodel, 452 U.S. at 295, 101 S.Ct. at 2370. On a facial challenge such as the one now before this Court, there is no way to do that. The Court has only the ordinance itself, which is an insufficient basis for a determination that the owner has been deprived of all economically viable use of his land. It is enough for surmise perhaps, but not enough for a finding.

Consequently, any claim that the rent control ordinance denies either Kissel or Adamson economically viable use of its land is not ripe for review.

This facial challenge, then, must be based on a contention that the rent control ordinance taken together with the zoning ordinance does not substantially advance a legitimate government purpose. Stated in a different way, this test requires that 111
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 25 there must be a nexus between the regulation and the *1502 purpose the government wishes to advance by means of the regulation. Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n, 483 U.S. 825, 837, 107 S.Ct. 3141, 3148–49, 97 L.Ed.2d 677 (1987).

The analysis here is similar to the due process analysis above. Indeed, the Ninth Circuit has suggested that the due process standard of reasonable relation to legitimate purpose applies in the regulatory takings field as well. Commercial Builders v. Sacramento, 941 F.2d 872, 874 (1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 931, 112 S.Ct. 1997, 118 L.Ed.2d 593 (1992); contra Azul Pacifico v. City of Los Angeles, 948 F.2d 575, 582 (9th Cir.1991), op. withdrawn, on reh'g appeal dismissed, 973 F.2d 704 (1992), and cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1081, 113 S.Ct. 1049, 122 L.Ed.2d 357 (1993) (“But the Supreme Court has held that the relationship between the means and the ends must be closer for purposes of Takings Clause analysis [than for due process analysis].”). Commercial Builders held that the “substantially advance” test does not require scrutiny any stricter than rational basis. This Court doubts that the Supreme Court meant “rationally related” when it wrote “substantially advance,” but because the rent control ordinance passes both tests, the Court need not consider the issue further. [30] The requirement that the ordinance substantially advance a legitimate purpose finds its practical application in the examination of whether a nexus exists between the function of the ordinance and the purpose the ordinance is intended to achieve. Nollan, 483 U.S. at 837, 107 S.Ct. at 3148–49. Nollan invalidated a building permit condition that required shoreside land owners to grant the public lateral access across their beach. Nollan, 483 U.S. at 837, 107 S.Ct. at 3148–49.

The Court held that the requirement that the public be allowed to walk across the petitioner's property bore no relation whatsoever to the government's stated interest in promoting the public's ability to see the beach. Id. The Court invalidated the permit condition because it was intended to alleviate a different problem than that caused by the permit to which it was attached. Id.
[31] The rent control ordinance acts directly to promote the legitimate interest pursuant to which it was enacted. Each part of the ordinance not invalid on due process grounds materially advances the goal of protecting the tenants' investment. The logical discontinuity between the purpose and the restriction that was present in Nollan is not presented by the City's rent control ordinance.

Rather, the problem with the rent control ordinance is that it is far more onerous than necessary to solve the problem that it set out to address. No matter how onerous it is, however, it is not overbroad in the constitutional sense of encompassing persons or behavior not related to its purpose.

Likewise, the incidental windfall received by the tenants in possession at the time the ordinance was enacted does not support a finding that the ordinance is a taking. That windfall is substantially related to the City's interest in giving buyers security as to what their future rent will be when they assume their tenancy. That the City may act to adjust the balance of the economic relationship between the park owners and the tenants is clear, and the windfall received by the initial tenants must be viewed as incidental to that adjustment. The timing of the adjustment is fortuitous. Since it is within the City's power to make such an adjustment, the incidental effect of a greater benefit to the initial group of tenants does not affect the validity of the ordinance because the later tenants also share the enhanced investment security that the ordinance was intended to create. The plaintiffs argue that a desire to grant a windfall to a powerful constituency influenced the City Council. However, the unstated motivations of the City Council are not relevant to the questions now before the Court. United States v. O'Brien, 391 U.S. 367, 383, 88 S.Ct. 1673, 1682, 20 L.Ed.2d 672 (1968) (“It is a familiar principle of constitutional law that this Court will not strike down an otherwise constitutional statute on the basis of an alleged illicit legislative motive.”). The rent control ordinance does not constitute a regulatory taking.
*1503 III. CONCLUSION
112
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 26 The City Council acted within the legitimate scope of its regulatory power when it acted to adjust the balance of investment expectations between the park owners and the tenants. The Court cannot usurp the City Council's legislative power by substituting its own judgment regarding the manner in which the investment expectations of the tenants and the owners should be balanced. The City Council chose to favor the tenants' investments over those of the park owners, and the Court, although it believes that the rent control ordinance is far more onerous than necessary, must accept that legislative choice.

The rent rollback and the moratorium provisions following the enactment of the City's rent control ordinance and the expiration of long term leases, as well as the fair return provision as it applies to the adjustment of base rent, are facially invalid because they fail to provide due process to the park owners. The ordinance in all other respects survives the plaintiffs' facial due process and equal protection challenges. Likewise, the rent control ordinance does not, on its face, effect a taking of the park owners' properties for which just compensation is required.

All Citations
854 F.Supp. 1476
Footnotes
1 Adamson also asserts a claim for inverse condemnation under the California Constitution.

The plaintiffs also sought relief on the ground that the rent control ordinance was an unconstitutional ex-post facto law or bill of attainder and that the rent control ordinance violated California Government Code § 54950 (the “Brown Act”), and the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Court has previously dismissed those claims.
2 Once in place, approximately one in every hundred mobile homes is ever moved. Hirsch & Hirsch, Legal–Economic Analysis of Rent Controls in a Mobile Home Context: Placement Values and Vacancy Decontrol, 35 U.C.L.A.L.Rev. 399, 405 (1988).
3 Oligopoly is perhaps a more appropriate term because rather than a single source, tenants are faced with a limited set of options in the mobile home market. However, because the City used the term “monopoly” to describe the economic condition that it believed justified its ordinance, the Court adopts that usage. 4 The Los Angeles County ordinance exempted all spaces in any park that offered a model lease set forth in the ordinance.
5 In the case of mobile home rentals, the term “vacancy” does not accurately describe the legal or physical condition of the land upon a change in tenancy. Usually, the tenant sells the coach in place on the property and the buyer of the coach takes the tenancy from the seller of the coach. Consequently, the space never actually becomes “vacant.” 6 The advisory agency is defined as “the Planning Department, commission, or hearing officer as designated by the City Council.” Rent Control Ordinance § 6723 B.16723 B.1. 7 Moreover, the zoning ordinance, by disallowing the operation of any more mobile home parks within the City of Malibu, adds to the problem allegedly addressed by the rent control ordinance. Although it is the City Council's role, not the Court's, to balance the competing interests of maintaining the low density character of Malibu and the need for more mobile home housing, it seems unfair for the City to require the very citizens who have acted to provide mobile home housing pay for a housing shortage created in part by the actions of the City Council itself. The unfairness of this result is only compounded by the City's failure to do any real study of the mobile home market in 113
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 27 Malibu.
8 For a detailed discussion of the concept of placement value see Hirsch & Hirsch, supra note 2, at 426–33. 9 Rent control also reduces the risk inherent in an investment in a mobile home tenancy. Therefore, if rent control is in place, because the investment is protected, the tenant would theoretically receive a higher price as a result of the reduction of that risk. However, because the reduction of risk represents nothing more than security in the tenant's proportionate stake in the placement value, any adjustment in the risk is a sub-element of the general adjustment of placement value effected by rent control.
10 To the extent that the City acted to penalize Kissel for alleged rent increases in violation of the Los Angeles County ordinance, it was acting in pursuit of an impermissible interest. 11 The base rate can be adjusted for an individual space only if it is the result of a lease provision that provided for variable rents throughout the time of the lease, a seasonal variation or because of a special circumstance such as a rebate or the pass-through of a capital improvement.
12 At the evidentiary hearing, plaintiffs' expert witness testified that at least one buyer bought a coach in place and then subsequently had it removed and replaced. No evidence was introduced that anyone in recent years has ever rented a vacant space in a Malibu park. In fact, the City strenuously argued that the Malibu parks had a zero vacancy rate. 13 The ordinance includes a “savings clause” that reads “[n]othing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the grant of a rent adjustment upon application by a park owner when required to permit a fair and reasonable return to the park owner....” Rent Control Ordinance § 6721. This savings clause does nothing to remedy the constitutional problem with the procedure for setting base rents. The City cannot enact a statute with very narrow requirements and then, by means of a boilerplate clause, assure the constitutionality of all its procedures. 14 Whether the enactment is discriminatory is discussed under the heading of equal protection. 15 This benefit is actually paid to the tenants by future tenants. Consequently, the ordinance, as enacted gives a one-time bonus to the tenants living in the park at the time it takes effect. This one-time benefit also conflicts with the City's rationale regarding the protection of low income tenants because, after the end of the initial tenancy, it is unlikely that any low income tenant could ever become a resident of either park. 16 Adamson's inverse condemnation claim is resolved here in conjunction with the plaintiffs' federal takings claims. In the context of takings by regulation, the prohibition against uncompensated takings under the California Constitution has been interpreted by the California courts to be narrower than that imposed by the United States Constitution.

Agins v. Tiburon, 24 Cal.3d 266, 157 Cal.Rptr. 372, 598 P.2d 25 (1979), affirmed on other grounds, 447 U.S. 255, 100 S.Ct. 2138, 65 L.Ed.2d 106 (1980) (holding that there is no right to monetary compensation for a regulatory taking in an inverse condemnation action); First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304, 107 S.Ct. 2378, 96 L.Ed.2d 250 (1987) (overruling the California Supreme Court's Decision in Agins ); 7 H. Miller & M. Starr, California Real Estate 2d § 23.18. More recently, California cases have applied federal takings principles to resolve California inverse condemnation claims. E.g., Twain Harte Assoc. v. County of Tuolumne, 217 Cal.App.3d 71, 265 Cal.Rptr. 737 (1990). 17 Yee would arguably fall into this category.
18 The basic rationale of the ripeness doctrine is to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements. Pacific Gas & Electric v. State Energy Conservation Comm'n, 461 U.S. 190, 200, 103 S.Ct. 1713, 1720, 75 L.Ed.2d 752 (1983). 19 The District of Hawaii has suggested that Southern Pacific should be interpreted to require a determination of available compensation prior to determination of whether a taking occurred only if the regulating governmental entity 114
Adamson Companies v. City of Malibu, 854 F.Supp. 1476 (1994) © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 28 has made no indication as to the amount of compensation available and it would therefore be necessary to wait for such a determination before deciding whether there had been a facial taking. Richardson v. City and County of Honolulu, 759 F.Supp. 1477, 1483 (D.Hawaii 1991). Richardson was a challenge to an ordinance that limited increases in renegotiated lease rents for residential condominiums according to the Consumer Price Index.

Richardson, 759 F.Supp. at 1479. Richardson held that because the ordinance set forth a formula for determining the allowable increases, the amount of compensation available under the ordinance was not entirely unclear.

Richardson, 759 F.Supp. at 1483. Richardson is ultimately unpersuasive, however, because the formula set forth by the statute does not set forth the amount of compensation available should the statute be adjudged a taking in an inverse condemnation action, but rather is only one factor in determining the amount of the taking itself. To determine just compensation, the Court would still have to establish a figure for market rent and then subtract the rent established under the formula from that figure, or otherwise determine what amount in addition to the allowable rent would constitute just compensation.
20 In this sense, the situation presented by Southern Pacific is identical to that in Williamson itself. Williamson, like Southern Pacific, was a challenge by a landowner to a zoning restriction. It was against this factual background that the Supreme Court held, in Williamson, that the factors applied in deciding a takings claim “simply cannot be evaluated until the administrative agency has arrived at a final, definitive position regarding how it will apply the regulations at issue to the particular land in question.” Williamson, 473 U.S. at 191, 105 S.Ct. at 3119 (emphasis added).
21 However, the claims are ripe only to the extent that they do not involve any contemplated change of use. 22 Yee also effectively overruled Azul Pacifico, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles, 948 F.2d 575 (9th Cir.1991), op. withdrawn, on reh'g appeal dismissed, 973 F.2d 704 (1992), and cert. denied, 506 U.S. 1081, 113 S.Ct. 1049, 122 L.Ed.2d 357 (1993), which explicitly followed Hall.
23 There is some suggestion in the legislative record to the rent control ordinance that Kissel presented a development proposal for Paradise Cove to the City Council, but that proposal is not in evidence.

End of Document © 2026 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 115
Attachment 5
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
1 From: Crawford, Malik - BLS <[email protected]> on behalf of cpi_info <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2021 9:23 AM
To: Mary Linden; cpi_info
Subject: RE: [cpi] CPI Data
Hello,
Thank you for contacting the Consumer Price Index program.

The browser is not the source of the challenge. In January 2018, a new geographic area sample was introduced, which you can read about here: https://www.bls.gov/cpi/additional-resources/geographic-revision-2018.htm. For more detail, click here: https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2016/article/the-2018-revision-of-the-cpi-geographic-sample.htm.

As part of the geographic sample revision, the Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA area (A421) was split into the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA (S49A) and Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA (S49C) areas. While the area definition has changed, for practical purposes you can consider the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA series continuous with the now-discontinued Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County, CA series. Because the latter is discontinued, you will only see data through 2017. For 2018 data, use the former.

You can find CPI-U, All items, Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim here: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUURS49ASA0.

For 12-month percent changes, click here: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUURS49ASA0?output_view=pct_12mths.

Please let us know if you have questions or need additional CPI data.

Malik Crawford
Economist
Information and Analysis Section
Consumer Price Index
US DOL, Bureau of Labor Statistics
[email protected]
CPI Info Line: 202-691-7000
Direct: 202-691-5375
From: Request for Consumer Price Indexes (CPI) Information [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2021 11:21 AM
To: cpi_info <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: [cpi] CPI Data
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.Bureau of Labor Statistics
Attachment 6
223
2 A user has contacted us. Here are the details of their message:

To receive an answer to your inquiry, enter the following:
* Email address:
[email protected]
* Full name:

Mary Linden
Telephone number:
3104562489
Telephone extension:
232
* Subject:

CPI Data
* Enter your question in the box below:

I work for the City of Malibu and access CPI data tables for the Los Angeles/Orange County region of California each year, but when I go to https://data.bls.gov/PDQWeb/cu, it doesn't allow me to access data beyond 2017. I need the November 2021 12-month percent change, and also like to include the chart for at least the past ten years as a reference. I have had problems in the past with certain browsers, but I've tried both Chrome and Edge and still can't get data after 2017.

We expect to reply within three working days. If you have not received a response within three working days, please send your request again.
224

Page 1 of 4 ends

Malibu City CouncilFebruary 9, 2026

Malibu City Council
February 9, 2026